Abstract:As with all digitally transformational technologies, AI systems’ technical complexity and rapidadoption in society fast and far outpace the current knowledge and experience of mostlawmakers and regulators and operate beyond the envisaged scope of many existing legaldoctrines and frameworks. Even if existing law is potentially adequate to address discriminatoryalgorithmic bias in some domains, the contextual “translation” of those laws to this brave new AIworld is indeterminate and uncertain. Further, due to the difficulty of enforcement against illegalalgorithmic discrimination, jurisprudential guidance is sparse and slow in coming.These gaps between the currently limited status of algorithmic law and the realities of the WildAI West create a void in which unscrupulous or merely unfettered and ambitious algorithmpurveyors may pursue enriching, but societally corrosive opportunities. Uninformed personsmaking decisions about and using AI systems may adopt and deploy such systems withoutappropriate insight, preparation, or restraint. Further, they may use algorithmic systems in wayscontrary to purveyors’ guidance, such with recidivism risk systems used in sentencing.All these factors coalesce to create the potential for discriminatorily-biased algorithms to doexponentially amplified, persistent, and irreparable harm to individuals, communities, andsociety. The need is urgent for a workable system of algorithmic justice by which to illuminateand eradicate discriminatory computational biases, or at least to more quickly identify them andreduce their incidence and duration. Fostering greater access to justice, public trust in AItechnology, and other important policy goals, an algorithmic justice system also would provideempirical mechanisms by which to establish baselines and measure and communicate the statusof progress toward eradicating discriminatory algorithm bias in State of the Algorithmic Nationreports, for example. In addition, this algorithmic justice system would provide a framework forcrafting meaningful policy, legislative, and regulatory systems for AI and a more accessible anddefinitive means of enforcing and litigating against illegal algorithmic discrimination.This work offers a new model toward an algorithmic justice system. As a beginning to addressthe likely immense and certainly multiply complex problem of discriminatory algorithmic bias,this new model commences with two foundational processes.

From algorithmic accountability to digital governance

The US Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2022 vs. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act: what can they learn from each other?

Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account

International Human Rights Law As A Framework For Algorithmic Accountability

Vectors of AI Governance - Juxtaposing the U.S. Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2022 with The EU Artificial Intelligence Act

A relationship and not a thing: A relational approach to algorithmic accountability and assessment documentation

Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learning

Towards an Equitable Digital Society: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR)

Reviewable Automated Decision-Making: A Framework for Accountable Algorithmic Systems

"Computer Says No": Algorithmic Decision Support and Organisational Responsibility

AI, on Algorithmic Justice: A New Proposal Toward the Identification and Reduction of Discriminatory Bias in Artificial Intelligence Systems [Abstract]

Audit and Assurance of AI Algorithms: A framework to ensure ethical algorithmic practices in Artificial Intelligence

Administrative Law in the Automated State

Towards algorithm auditing: managing legal, ethical and technological risks of AI, ML and associated algorithms

Algorithmic bias: Looking beyond data bias to ensure algorithmic accountability and equity

Rethinking Administrative Law for Algorithmic Decision Making

Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation

The Algorithmic Leviathan: Arbitrariness, Fairness, and Opportunity in Algorithmic Decision Making Systems

A Model for Evaluating Algorithmic Systems Accountability

Law and the Emerging Political Economy of Algorithmic Audits