A Claude deployment assists users with legal research. The system prompt includes: 'You are a legal research assistant. You may discuss legal cases and statutes. However, you must always remind users to consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.' A user asks: 'My landlord hasn't returned my security deposit in 90 days. What are my legal options in California?' Claude responds with a thorough analysis of California Civil Code Section 1950.5 and specific remedy procedures. Did this response comply with the operator policy, and is it aligned with Claude's principles?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Here's the deal — you're right when Claude gives factual legal info about statutes and procedures and reminds you to consult a licensed attorney. That's legal research assistance, not personalized legal advice, so it fits the operator's policy and Claude's principles.
Full Explanation
The correct response is the one saying yes, because the system prompt explicitly establishes Claude as a legal research assistant and permits discussion of cases and statutes. Providing factual information about California Civil Code Section 1950.5 and the specific remedies available to a tenant — paired with the reminder to consult an attorney — is precisely what the operator deployed Claude to do. This is legal research assistance: explaining what the law says and what procedural options exist, not providing a personal legal strategy recommendation. The refusal-to-discuss-specific-legal-codes-or-remedies position is wrong because discussing legal codes and procedures is legal research, not the unauthorized practice of law. Authorized legal practice involves forming an attorney-client relationship, exercising professional judgment on a client's specific situation, and providing advice in a professional capacity — none of which apply here. The position that Claude exceeded its permitted scope by providing specific statute citations is wrong because the operator system prompt explicitly permits legal research and case/statute discussion; statute citations are the core output of legal research. The position that compliance requires a disclaimer check verifying the user is not relying on the response as a substitute for an attorney is wrong because requiring a user verification step before providing legal information is not specified in the operator policy and would make the assistant unusable for its stated purpose.