About

Sonia Katyal is a faculty member at UC Berkeley Law with a focus on social justice, public interest, and law and technology. Her work involves engaging with issues related to human rights, criminal justice, environmental law, and public policy, contributing to various clinics and projects that address systemic inequalities and promote social change. She is actively involved in clinical programs that provide legal advocacy and support for marginalized communities, including the Death Penalty Clinic, Human Rights Clinic, and other initiatives aimed at advancing justice and equity. Her contributions extend to fostering community engagement and developing innovative legal strategies through her participation in numerous outreach and advocacy projects. Katyal's work emphasizes the importance of law in addressing social issues and empowering vulnerable populations, making her a significant figure in the intersection of law, social justice, and public policy at Berkeley Law.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Sociology
• Law
• Psychology
• Law and economics
• Gender studies
• Criminology

Selected publications

• Democracy and Distrust in an Era of Artificial Intelligence

  arXiv (Cornell University) · 2026-01-14

  preprintOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  This essay examines how judicial review should adapt to address challenges posed by artificial intelligence decision-making, particularly regarding minority rights and interests. As I argue in this essay, the rise of three trends-privatization, prediction, and automation in AI-have combined to pose similar risks to minorities. Here, I outline what a theory of judicial review would look like in an era of artificial intelligence, analyzing both the limitations and the possibilities of judicial review of AI. I draw on cases in which AI decision-making has been challenged in courts, to show how concepts of due process and equal protection can be recuperated in a modern AI era, and even integrated into AI, to provide for better oversight and accountability, offering a framework for judicial review in the AI era that protects minorities from algorithmic discrimination.

  PublisherDOI

• Democracy and Distrust in an Era of Artificial Intelligence

  ArXiv.org · 2026-01-14

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  This essay examines how judicial review should adapt to address challenges posed by artificial intelligence decision-making, particularly regarding minority rights and interests. As I argue in this essay, the rise of three trends-privatization, prediction, and automation in AI-have combined to pose similar risks to minorities. Here, I outline what a theory of judicial review would look like in an era of artificial intelligence, analyzing both the limitations and the possibilities of judicial review of AI. I draw on cases in which AI decision-making has been challenged in courts, to show how concepts of due process and equal protection can be recuperated in a modern AI era, and even integrated into AI, to provide for better oversight and accountability, offering a framework for judicial review in the AI era that protects minorities from algorithmic discrimination.

  PublisherOA PDF

• Lex Reformatica: Five Principles of Policy Reform for the Technological Age

  arXiv (Cornell University) · 2026-01-14

  preprintOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Twenty-five years ago, Joel Reidenberg argued that technology itself, not just law and regulation, imposes rules on communities in the Information Society. System design choices like network architecture and configurations create regulatory norms he termed "Lex Informatica"-referencing the merchant-driven medieval "Lex Mercatoria" that emerged independent of sovereign control. Today we face different challenges requiring us to revisit Reidenberg's insights and examine the consequences of that earlier era. While Lex Informatica provided a framework for analyzing the internet's birth, we now confront the aftereffects of decades of minimal or absent regulation. Critical questions emerge: When technological social norms develop outside clear legal restraints, who benefits and who suffers? This new era demands infrastructural reform focused on the interplay between public and private regulation and self-regulation, weighing both costs and benefits. Rather than showcasing the promise of yesterday's internet age, today's events reveal the pitfalls of information libertarianism and underscore the urgent need for new approaches to information regulation. This Issue presents articles from two symposiums-one on Lex Informatica and another on race and technology law. Their conversation is now essential. Together, these papers demonstrate what I call the "Lex Reformatica" of today's digital age. This collection shows why scholars, lawyers, and legislators must return to Reidenberg's foundational work and update its trajectory toward a reform-focused approach designed for our current era.

  PublisherDOI

• Lex Reformatica: Five Principles of Policy Reform for the Technological Age

  ArXiv.org · 2026-01-14

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Twenty-five years ago, Joel Reidenberg argued that technology itself, not just law and regulation, imposes rules on communities in the Information Society. System design choices like network architecture and configurations create regulatory norms he termed "Lex Informatica"-referencing the merchant-driven medieval "Lex Mercatoria" that emerged independent of sovereign control. Today we face different challenges requiring us to revisit Reidenberg's insights and examine the consequences of that earlier era. While Lex Informatica provided a framework for analyzing the internet's birth, we now confront the aftereffects of decades of minimal or absent regulation. Critical questions emerge: When technological social norms develop outside clear legal restraints, who benefits and who suffers? This new era demands infrastructural reform focused on the interplay between public and private regulation and self-regulation, weighing both costs and benefits. Rather than showcasing the promise of yesterday's internet age, today's events reveal the pitfalls of information libertarianism and underscore the urgent need for new approaches to information regulation. This Issue presents articles from two symposiums-one on Lex Informatica and another on race and technology law. Their conversation is now essential. Together, these papers demonstrate what I call the "Lex Reformatica" of today's digital age. This collection shows why scholars, lawyers, and legislators must return to Reidenberg's foundational work and update its trajectory toward a reform-focused approach designed for our current era.

  PublisherOA PDF

• Democracy & Distrust in an Era of Artificial Intelligence

  Daedalus · 2022 · 11 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Political Science
  • Sociology
  • Political Science

  Abstract Our legal system has historically operated under the general view that courts should defer to the legislature. There is one significant exception to this view: cases in which it appears that the political process has failed to recognize the rights or interests of minorities. This basic approach provides much of the foundational justifications for the role of judicial review in protecting minorities from discrimination by the legislature. Today, the rise of AI decision-making poses a similar challenge to democracy's basic framework. As I argue in this essay, the rise of three trends-privatization, prediction, and automation in AI - have combined to pose similar risks to minorities. In this essay, I outline what a theory of judicial review would look like in an era of artificial intelligence, analyzing both the limitations and the possibilities of judicial review of AI. Here, I draw on cases in which AI decision-making has been challenged in courts, to show how concepts of due process and equal protection can be recuperated in a modern AI era, and even integrated into AI, to provide for better oversight and accountability.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• The Gender Panopticon: Artificial Intelligence, Gender, and Design Justice

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2021 · 22 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Sociology
  • Political Science
  • Sociology
  PublisherDOI

• The Gender Panopticon: Artificial Intelligence and Design Justice

  UCLA law review · 2021-01-01

  article1st authorCorresponding
  Publisher

• From Trade Secrecy to Seclusion

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Race, Trademarks, and Appropriation: An Empirical Analysis

  University of Illinois law review · 2020-01-01

  article1st authorCorresponding
  Publisher

• Trademark Search, Artificial Intelligence and the Role of the Private Sector

  ArXiv.org · 2020-01-01 · 7 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Almost every industry today confronts the potential role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in its future. While many studies examine AI in consumer marketing, less attention addresses AI's role in creating and selecting trademarks that are distinctive, recognizable, and meaningful to consumers. Traditional economic approaches to trademarks focus almost exclusively on consumer-based, demand-side considerations regarding search. However, these approaches are incomplete because they fail to account for substantial costs faced not just by consumers, but by trademark applicants as well. Given AI's rapidly increasing role in trademark search and similarity analysis, lawyers and scholars should understand its dramatic implications. This paper proposes that AI should interest anyone studying trademarks and their role in economic decision-making. We examine how machine learning techniques will transform the application and interpretation of foundational trademark doctrines, producing significant implications for the trademark ecosystem. We run empirical experiments regarding trademark search to assess the efficacy of various trademark search engines, many of which employ machine learning methods. Through comparative analysis, we evaluate how these AI-powered tools function in practice. In an age where artificial intelligence increasingly governs trademark selection, the classic division between consumers and trademark owners deserves an updated, supply-side framework. This insight has transformative potential for encouraging both innovation and efficiency in trademark law and practice.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Eduardo M. Peñalver

  22 shared

• Kristen A. Carpenter

  5 shared

• Sheila R. Foster

  Columbia University

  4 shared

• Angela Riley

  Aurora Health Care

  4 shared

• Leah Chan Grinvald

  3 shared

• Jason Schultz

  3 shared

• Elizabeth B. Cooper

  3 shared

• Rebecca Tushnet

  3 shared