V
Visalaw AI

Visalaw AI is a research and drafting platform for immigration lawyers from Visalaw Ventures, Inc. of Memphis, Tennessee. It grew out of tools built inside an immigration law firm from 2020 and launched on its own in early 2024. Its Research Agent, released in version 2.1, works out what kind of question it has, reads regulations, case law and the firm's documents, and verifies its citations against the source text before answering.

The library combines agency materials, AILA publications and more than 10 million cases from over 2,000 courts. It drafts petitions, briefs and letters for a published list of business, family and humanitarian case types, and translates, summarizes and analyzes uploaded documents in projects organized by matter. It is built for AILA members, with paralegals working under a supervising attorney's account, and its contracts bar training on customer data by Visalaw or its model providers. Core costs $220 a month per license and Pro $480.

Compared with

Visalaw AI, head to head

Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.

Build your own comparison

Capability grades

All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.

BB on AI CentralityThe models are the engine of a core capability, layered on a product that would still function without them as a document or workflow system.

AI Centrality

How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.

Research, drafting, document analysis, translation and summarization are model work, and the plans are priced around them. In version 2.1, Research Agent decides what kind of question it faces, picks the sources, reads them and writes the answer, and drafting turns case facts into petitions and briefs. Around the models sit projects organized by matter, team permissions and audit trails, electronic signature, certified translation and a curated immigration library, which a connector gives Claude read only access to. Without the models, the curated library and the case workspace would remain.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Citation Accuracy and Hallucination DisclosureGrounding is real and documented, with linked primary sources and a described retrieval method, short of published accuracy figures an outsider can test.

Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure

Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.

Version 2.1 verifies citations against the source text before an answer reaches the user, and a citation opens beside the answer at the page with the supporting passage highlighted. Research Agent reads about five sources on a typical question and goes to the open web only when the question calls for it. Users choose which collections are in scope, from United States immigration law and case law to Canadian immigration law, live government sites and unpublished BIA decisions.

The library spans agency materials, BIA and AAO decisions, AILA publications and more than 10 million cases from over 2,000 courts. The connector for Claude ranks results by authority, matches cited authorities against the library catalog and draws case law from CourtListener. No accuracy rate or evaluation of answers is published, and the claim of accuracy every time rests on no measurement.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside a supervising lawyer, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.

Autonomy and Oversight Model

What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.

The Platform Agreement makes the customer responsible for evaluating output, and the about page says the technology supports professional judgment rather than replacing it. Paralegals and assistants work under a supervising attorney's account with audit trails. Research Agent shows each step as it works, lets the user expand finished steps or stop early with Answer Now, and proposes follow up questions that send nothing until the user does.

Drafts are generated for editing and AI revision in the platform, and Kuck Baxter describes using them for early drafting while senior attorneys handle judgment, revision and client strategy. No limit is published on what a draft may be used for, and no review step is required before a petition leaves the platform.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Operational and Outcome EvidenceReal deployment evidence with substance, short of full attribution or measurement: a named customer without figures, or figures without the named customer.

Operational and Outcome Evidence

Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.

Customer stories come from Charles Kuck of Kuck Baxter Immigration, Cyrus Mehta of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners and Ken Robinson, a solo business immigration lawyer who says the platform saves him four to six hours a week. Kuck Baxter uses it for early drafting and Mehta as a research assistant during live client consultations. The pricing page claims more than ten hours saved per case and $60,000 a year, assuming ten drafts a month.

The 2.1 release reports typical research answers in 15 to 30 seconds against about 90 seconds in 2.0, from about 180 questions run in September 2026. The customer figures are self reported and undated, with no method.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on Privilege and Confidentiality PostureWritten commitments a buyer can read before signing: no training on client data, segregation documented at the level the buyer segment requires (matter level walls for a firm, tenant level separation for an in house team), privilege and work product handling addressed directly, retention and deletion stated, and the position on third party model providers made explicit.

Privilege and Confidentiality Posture

How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.

Section 4.3 of the Platform Agreement bars Visalaw and its third party model providers from training any AI model on customer data or content. Confidential information stays protected for the term and ten years after it ends. The Security Addendum scopes every record to an organization identifier and isolates each firm's embeddings in the shared vector index, and model providers may not keep or share content after a call.

The Data Processing Addendum keeps customer data, matter level content included, in the customer's own tenant environment without pooling it with others. The connector for Claude writes none of the questions asked through it to its logs and trains nothing. Visalaw's post on the Heppner ruling sets out how privilege and work product apply to AI use and how firms can protect them.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on UPL and Professional Responsibility PostureA real position is published on advice versus tooling, short of full treatment: commonly a disclaimer without the supervision and competence dimension, or silence on jurisdiction limits.

UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture

Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.

The Platform Agreement calls the service a research and drafting tool whose output is not legal advice and may contain errors. The platform FAQ says it is designed for immigration attorneys and professionals who are AILA members, and that paralegals and assistants use it only under a supervising attorney's account with audit trails. No jurisdiction limit is stated, although research now includes a Canadian immigration law collection.

The same FAQ says the product ensures ethical compliance and accuracy every time, which only the lawyer using it can ensure.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureResponsible AI principles are published without a mechanism, a testing regime, or anything a buyer could audit.

AI Governance and Bias Disclosure

Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.

Visalaw's about page sets out principles, including that technology should support professional judgment rather than replace it. The security page lists ISO/IEC 42001 as in progress, and the Security Addendum covers model provider security, from encrypted transfer to bans on training and retention. Under the Data Processing Addendum, both parties will cooperate on changes if new AI regulation requires them. Version 2.1 came with early results from about 180 research questions run by the team and a pilot group in September 2026, measuring speed and the number of sources read rather than accuracy.

No one is named as accountable for model quality, and nothing is published on testing before a model or prompt change, or on uneven output across case types, languages or applicants' nationalities.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Safety and Data StewardshipSubstantive published policy covering most of the ground, short of the full set: commonly no named subprocessor list or no stated incident practice.

AI Safety and Data Stewardship

Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.

The Security Addendum commits Visalaw to AES 256 encryption at rest and TLS 1.2 or higher in transit, least privilege access with multifactor authentication, and annual third party penetration tests. Critical vulnerabilities are fixed within 30 days and high ones within 60, and staff with access to customer data are screened. A security incident is reported without undue delay and within 24 hours of detection, and an independent forensic assessor investigates at Visalaw's expense.

After termination, customer data and content are returned or deleted at the customer's election, with certification of deletion on request. New subprocessors come with at least 60 days' notice and a right to object, but the subprocessor list itself sits in a trust portal that opens after an access request. The connector for Claude logs only the tool name, user and organization for each call, never the query, and deletes those logs after 30 days.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Liability and RecourseA real published position on liability, short of the full picture: commonly a stated indemnity without scope or caps.

AI Liability and Recourse

What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.

The Platform Agreement of 17 March 2026 has Visalaw defend and indemnify customers against third party claims that the service infringes intellectual property or arises from Visalaw's violation of law. The customer in turn indemnifies Visalaw for claims arising from customer data or the use of any content, which includes output. General liability is capped at the fees paid in the prior twelve months, with a separate cap of twice annual fees for security incidents involving customer data.

Visalaw carries commercial general, technology errors and omissions and cyber liability insurance, with certificates on request and no amounts stated. The service is provided as is, and the agreement says output is generated by AI, may contain errors and is not legal advice.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Practice Systems Integration DepthReal integrations exist and are documented, short of depth: named connections without a description of what they actually move.

Practice Systems Integration Depth

How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.

Visalaw's integration partners are the eImmigration case management system by Cerenade, Clio and Docketwise, with Candle AI for email, MotaWord for translation and Google Drive, OneDrive and Dropbox for files. It has also announced an integration with Mitratech INSZoom, and API access goes to selected customers and partners on request. The connector for Claude has a public README, last updated in September 2026, giving the server address, the transport, OAuth 2.1 with PKCE, a single read only scope and tokens that expire after 90 days.

Its seven tools cover the library by topic, INA and CFR citations, case law, full documents and the firm's saved prompts, limited to what the user's organization can already see. What the practice system integrations exchange, and in which direction, is not documented.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyDeployment options and data residency are published, including the regions available, what changes between tiers, and where processing happens as distinct from where data is stored.

Deployment Model and Data Residency

Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.

Customer data and content are stored and processed in the United States, hosted by default in the East 1 regions of AWS and MongoDB. Replication stays within other regions in the United States unless agreed in writing. Customers may ask for a specific region, which Visalaw accommodates where feasible and may charge for. The service runs on shared infrastructure with data separated logically by organization at the application and database layers.

Content goes to model providers over encrypted API calls and may not be kept beyond the call. Encryption keys are managed by the cloud providers, with no customer managed or tenant specific keys. The Data Processing Addendum describes a dedicated tenant environment, so the two addenda describe tenancy differently.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Security Certifications and Trust CenterCertification is real and stated, short of accessible evidence: a named standard without scope, date, or a way to obtain the report.

Security Certifications and Trust Center

Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.

The security program is audited against SOC 2 Type II, and ISO 27001 is targeted for the fourth quarter of 2026. Under the Security Addendum, audit reports, penetration test summaries and answers to security questionnaires come on request at no cost, and Visalaw will adopt an equivalent standard if it drops an audit. The security page lists a dedicated chief information security officer, SAML single sign on, audit logs, IP allow listing and configurable data lifecycle controls.

It points to a trust portal hosted on Drata that opens after an access request. The auditor, report period and scope, including whether the models are covered, are not published.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Model Supply Chain DisclosureThe supply chain is partly disclosed: providers named without change notification, or architecture described without the providers.

Model Supply Chain Disclosure

Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.

Section 6 of the Security Addendum sends content to contracted model providers over encrypted APIs and bars them from training on it, keeping it beyond a single call or passing it to anyone else. Visalaw keeps documentation of which subprocessors receive data at each stage. The Platform Agreement and Data Processing Addendum give at least 60 days' notice before a new subprocessor or a material change in scope, with a right to object.

The model providers themselves are listed only in a trust portal that opens after an access request, and no model is named for any feature. The connector for Claude names CourtListener, which receives case law requests without account details.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on Commercial TransparencyA buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, and what implementation adds.

Commercial Transparency

Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.

Core costs $220 a month per license, billed annually, for research, chat, document analysis, translation, BIA decisions and a case management integration, with occasional drafts at $150 each. Pro is $480 a month per license and adds ten petition or brief drafts a month, about $26 a draft. Enterprise, for firms of three or more, is quoted and adds unlimited drafting, free paralegal access, dedicated onboarding and team controls.

A comparison table shows what each plan includes, and a return calculator models recovered hours and value from a firm's own matters, hourly rate or fees, with its assumptions shown. Each attorney or paralegal using the platform needs a license, and a two week free trial opens after a demo.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on Firm and Practice CoverageWho the product serves is documented precisely: firm segments, in house and government use, and the practice areas actually supported, with the limits stated.

Firm and Practice Coverage

Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.

Visalaw AI is built for immigration attorneys and professionals who are AILA members, from solo practitioners such as Ken Robinson to firms such as Kuck Baxter and Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners, and Enterprise serves firms of three or more. The platform lists the case types it drafts. Business petitions run from O-1A and EB-1A to H-1B, L-1 and E-2, and family matters include I-485, I-601A and N-400. Humanitarian work covers asylum, T and U visas and VAWA, alongside RFEs, motions and BIA appeals.

Research covers United States immigration law and case law and a Canadian immigration law collection. Paralegals work only under a supervising attorney's account. Work outside immigration is outside the product, and the connector for Claude leaves state courts out of case law results unless asked.

Source: Vendor Published
Sources on file

8 public documents

The public pages on file for Visalaw AI, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.

Pricing

$220 a month per license

USD, as published, never converted
  • The Core plan costs $220 a month per license, billed yearly, for immigration research, document analysis and translation.
  • On Core, a drafted petition or brief costs $150 each.
  • The Pro plan costs $480 a month and includes 10 drafts a month, which works out to about $26 a draft.
  • Firms of three or more can get an Enterprise plan with unlimited drafting and free paralegal access at a custom price.
  • Each attorney or paralegal who uses it needs a license.
  • You need to be an AILA member to use it.

Core costs $220 per month per license, billed annually. It covers research and AI chat, the curated immigration dataset, BIA decisions, document analysis, summarization, translation and projects. It also includes more than 100 AI automations, a case management integration and standard support, and occasional drafts cost $150 each, paid as used. Pro costs $480 per month per license, billed annually, and adds 10 petition and brief drafts a month, about $26 a draft.

Enterprise, for firms of three or more, is priced on request and adds multiple licenses, unlimited drafting and free paralegal access. It also brings dedicated onboarding and training, priority support and team controls, with in person training in the United States only. One license is needed for each attorney or paralegal using the platform.

Note: Figures are from the vendor's pricing page in October 2026. Plans are priced per license, and the page's calculator counts one license per attorney or paralegal using the platform.

Legal Signals

What each signal means

A signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.

Confidentiality and Privilege

Client Data in Training

Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?

Never, in the contract

The published terms prohibit training on customer content. Not a policy page, the agreement.

Section 4.3 of the Platform Agreement commits that neither Visalaw nor its third party model providers will train any AI model on customer data or content. Subprocessors other than cloud storage may not keep or log it for human review. The Data Processing Addendum repeats the commitment, and the security page says inputs, outputs and uploads are not used to train, fine tune or improve models.

Source: Vendor PublishedCompany will not train any AI models using Customer Data or Content.As of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Prompt and Output Retention

How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?

Customer controlled, no zero option

The customer controls the retention window, by product configuration or by contractual instruction, but zero retention is not stated as available.

Customers decide what is uploaded, how long it is kept and when it is deleted, and the platform has configurable data lifecycle controls. After termination, Visalaw returns or deletes customer data and content at the customer's election and certifies the deletion on request. Model providers may not keep content beyond the API call, and no fixed period for prompts and output is stated.

Source: Vendor Publishedreturn or delete Customer Data and ContentAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation

Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?

Own model, documented

The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.

Every record is scoped to an organization identifier enforced through access tokens at the API layer, and embeddings in the shared vector index are filtered by organization. Within a firm, projects organized by matter, role based access and audit trails control who sees what. How project permissions keep one matter apart from another inside a firm is not documented.

Source: Vendor PublishedEvery record is scoped by a unique organisation identifierAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice

If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?

Notice committed

Terms commit to notice where lawfully permitted. No transparency report located.

The Data Processing Addendum commits Visalaw to tell the customer of any legally binding law enforcement request for its data where the law allows, and to seek a waiver where notice is barred. Visalaw publishes no transparency report.

Source: Vendor Publishedany legally binding request for disclosure of DPA Data by a law enforcement authorityAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence
Accuracy and Authority

Primary Law Corpus Provenance

Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?

Sources named, basis unstated

Sources are identified without stating the license or rights basis.

Visalaw's coverage page names its collections, among them the INA, Titles 8, 22 and 29 of the United States Code and their regulations, and Federal Register notices. It also lists the Foreign Affairs Manual, published and unpublished BIA decisions and BALCA decisions. Agency material comes from USCIS, DOS, DOL, EOIR, ICE and CBP, alongside a list of AILA publications and Visalaw's own Alan House Publishing titles. Case law covers more than 10 million decisions from over 2,000 courts, and the connector draws it from CourtListener. No license basis is stated for the case law or the AILA material.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Good Law Verification

Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.

Version 2.1 verifies each citation against the source text before answering, and the connector for Claude matches cited authorities against the library catalog. Neither covers a case's later history or flags overruled authority.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior

What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.

Research Agent shows each step, and Answer Now returns what it has gathered before a long run finishes. What the system does when the sources do not support an answer is not described, and no confidence signal is shown.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Fabricated Citation Record

Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?

None located

No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.

Damien Charlotin's AI Hallucination Cases database, which records court decisions involving hallucinated AI content, lists no case naming Visalaw AI. Visalaw drafts briefs, motions and BIA appeals that cite case law for filing with agencies and courts.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence
Professional Responsibility

Bar Guidance Alignment

Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?

Generic reference

Public materials refer to professional responsibility in general terms without naming guidance.

Visalaw's post on the February 2026 ruling in United States v. Heppner explains why a client's consumer AI output was held neither privileged nor work product and discusses the Kovel doctrine for AI used at counsel's direction. It advises attorneys to tell clients in writing about AI use and to default to enterprise tools. No bar ethics opinion or EOIR guidance is named.

Source: Vendor PublishedAI literacy is no longer optionalAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Billing and Fee Posture

Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?

Savings claims only

Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.

Visalaw claims more than ten hours saved per case and $60,000 a year at ten drafts a month, and its return calculator models value from a firm's hourly rate or benchmark fees. Ken Robinson reports saving four to six hours a week. Nothing addresses how firms should bill or disclose AI assisted work to clients.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness

Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?

On request only

The material exists behind a sales conversation or an executed agreement.

The subprocessor and model provider list sits in a trust portal that opens after an access request. Audit reports, penetration test summaries and answers to security questionnaires come on request at no cost. The contracts themselves are public, barring training by Visalaw and its providers, stating hosting in the United States and giving 60 days' notice of subprocessor changes.

Source: Vendor PublishedUpon request, and at no additional cost to You, Visalaw will provide YouAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence

Court Disclosure Support

If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?

Partial record

Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.

Each answer carries citations that open at the supporting passage, and Research Agent's steps, its lookups included, can be expanded afterward. Projects keep audit trails of team activity. Nothing records which model produced a draft or who verified it, and no export is described for filings with USCIS, EOIR or the courts.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 14, 2026Evidence
Contact

Correct a record, or ask how something was graded

Every grade and every signal on this index is drawn from public sources and dated. If a record is wrong, out of date, or missing an artifact the index did not locate, send the source and it will be reviewed and the record redated. Vendors are welcome to submit documentation. Nothing on this index is for sale, including a listing, a placement, or a grade.

AI Legal Index

The AI Legal Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in legal. It holds 462 vendors across 9 categories, each graded on the same 15 capability axes and recorded against 12 legal signals, from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
October 30, 2026
The AI Legal Index is an editorial reference. It is not a regulatory body, not a law firm, and nothing published here is legal advice or a recommendation to retain or avoid a vendor. Records are verified against published sources, bar guidance and public court records. Where a record reads not addressed, the material was not located in public sources on the date shown. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Legal Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746