What I’m all about
Hi,It’s Me, Stevie
I’ve spent my career working where the rules are still being written. ☻
So How’d We Get
Here.
✹✦✹
I spent the past few years working at leading AI companies like OpenAI, MercorAI, and xAI. I’m also a technology lawyer, startup General Counsel, and legal scholar focused on artificial intelligence and the legal systems being reshaped by it.
My work sits at the intersection of emerging technology, corporate practice, and legal scholarship. I am particularly interested in a problem that is becoming harder for law to avoid: what happens when artificial intelligence stops functioning merely as a tool and begins exercising authority, making decisions, communicating with third parties, executing transactions, and producing legally significant consequences?
Much of American law assumes that somewhere behind an action is a human actor whose authority, knowledge, intent, or conduct can be identified. Increasingly autonomous AI systems complicate that assumption. My scholarship examines the resulting gaps across areas including evidence, agency, financial markets, professional representation, healthcare, corporate governance, and regulatory design.
But I came to these questions through practice rather than technology theory.
From technology practice to AI law
Before focusing my work on artificial intelligence, I spent years advising technology companies and working in biglaw, inside startups, including serving in General Counsel and other senior legal roles.
Working alongside founders and executives taught me that emerging-technology law rarely arrives as a clean doctrinal question. It arrives as a product decision, a contract negotiation, a regulatory ambiguity, a financing problem, a board question, or a business team asking whether something that has never been done before can legally be done at all.
That experience continues to shape how I approach AI.
The most consequential questions surrounding artificial intelligence will not be resolved solely by statutes or judicial opinions. They will also be resolved inside companies as lawyers, engineers, executives, regulators, and boards translate old legal concepts into decisions about technologies those concepts were never designed to govern.
My work focuses on that translation.
A research agenda built around machine action
My current scholarship examines the emerging legal architecture surrounding increasingly autonomous artificial intelligence.
Across different areas of law, I keep encountering versions of the same underlying problem.
Who acts when an AI system acts?
Who possesses legally relevant knowledge?
Where does delegated authority begin and end?
How should courts evaluate records created by systems whose outputs may not be reproducible?
When does an AI system cross the line from providing information to exercising regulated authority?
And who bears responsibility when existing doctrine cannot comfortably locate the human decision-maker it expects to find?
My research approaches these questions across doctrinal boundaries rather than treating “AI law” as a single new regulatory field. Evidence, agency, securities regulation, healthcare law, professional responsibility, corporate governance, and administrative law may appear to present different AI problems. Increasingly, they are confronting the same structural challenge: legal systems designed around human action are encountering machines capable of acting with increasing independence.
That is the research program connecting my scholarship.
Practice, policy, and scholarship
I believe the strongest work on emerging technology moves in both directions between theory and practice.
My legal experience informs the problems I study. Scholarship allows me to examine those problems beyond the constraints of a particular transaction or client matter. Policy engagement tests those ideas against developing regulatory frameworks. And conversations with lawyers, technologists, executives, and researchers continually expose where legal theory does and does not match technological reality.
My work has included legal scholarship, practitioner writing, regulatory and standards-related comments, and interdisciplinary research presented in the United States and internationally.
Across those settings, the objective is the same: to help develop legal institutions capable of governing increasingly capable artificial systems without losing sight of the businesses, professionals, and people who must actually operate under those rules.
What I'm working on now
My current work focuses principally on autonomous and agentic AI, including questions of authority, attribution, evidentiary integrity, machine identity, liability, market behavior, professional representation, and governance.
I also continue to work on artificial intelligence in highly regulated environments, particularly healthcare and financial markets, where the consequences of getting governance wrong can be especially significant.
I write and speak regularly about artificial intelligence, emerging technology law, and the institutions being built to govern them.
