Algorithmic Justice: The Legal Implications of AI in Criminal Sentencing and Risk Assessment

Artificial intelligence is becoming deeply embedded in criminal justice systems, particularly for sentencing decisions and risk assessment. This represents a major change in how legal decisions are made. Tools like COMPAS and HART promise to make the justice system more consistent, efficient, and objective. However, these technologies bring serious legal and ethical problems. The algorithms typically draw on historical data that contains existing biases, which leads to discriminatory results that hit ethnic minorities especially hard. These tools end up reinforcing the very inequalities they claim to address. Making matters worse, many of these systems are proprietary black boxes that courts and defendants cannot examine or challenge, which violates basic principles of transparency and accountability needed for fair trials. This article analyses the legal consequences of using algorithmic risk assessment tools in criminal justice. It argues that adopting these systems without careful scrutiny threatens core legal protections: the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and the role of judicial discretion. Unless we implement serious reforms to address algorithmic bias, ensure transparency, and protect due process rights, we risk allowing flawed computer predictions to replace human judgment in determining people's fates.