How We Use AI in Our Editorial Process
Our regulatory analysis is drafted with AI assistance and verified by human editors. The process is human led and AI assisted.
Human led, AI assisted
We use AI tools in our editorial process, and we will not pretend otherwise. We use AI powered tools to help research and organize our coverage, but our human editorial team holds ultimate accountability for everything that appears on AI Regulation News. A claim of zero AI use would be false, and a false claim is not a standard we are willing to set on a page about trust.
The simplest way to say it: our process is human led and AI assisted. AI helps us read large volumes of statute, docket, and agency material faster. A named human editor decides what is true, what matters to a working professional, and what gets published. That judgment is not delegated to a model.
What our human editors do
The decisions that determine accuracy and accountability are made by people. Our human editors:
- Select all topics. A person decides which regulatory development is worth covering for a working professional, and which is noise.
- Verify every primary source against the original text. We open the statute, the court order, or the agency release and read it directly.
- Fact check all claims. Every factual assertion is paired with its primary citation and checked by a person before it is allowed to stand.
- Write and approve the final analysis and judgments. The interpretation, the status label, and the workflow consequence are written and signed off by a human editor.
What AI tools do
AI tools assist with initial research, drafting, and summarizing, always under human supervision. They help us gather and organize material and produce a first pass that an editor then verifies, corrects, and rewrites. The tools accelerate the work. They do not make the call on what is accurate or what gets published.
No article publishes without a human
AI systems do not independently publish to this site. No article is published without a human editor reviewing and approving it for accuracy, context, and clarity. The accountability sits with a named person, not a model.
Named accountability
One named editor is accountable for what appears on AI Regulation News: Anthony Guerriero, founder of The Leveraged Years. The same person who decides what we cover answers for any error. If something is wrong, a human owns it, corrects it, and dates the change.
This disclosure sits alongside our full Editorial Standards, which set out our primary source first sourcing policy, our review before publish process, and our corrections policy. Read them together. They describe one continuous process: AI assists, a human verifies against the primary source, and a named editor approves.
Trust in a regulation tracker depends on knowing how the work is made. We label AI assisted work plainly so you can weigh our coverage with full information, and so the standard we hold ourselves to is visible rather than implied. To report a concern about our process, email anthony@theleveragedyears.com.
Last reviewed: June 25, 2026.