Many top conservatives slammed the bipartisan agreement reached between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy over the weekend that is expected to prevent the U.S. from defaulting on its debt.

While the details of the agreement are still being ironed out, and congressional leaders still have to convince their Members to vote for it, some on the top Republicans in Washington, D.C., are not happy with the agreement.

“There are members of the GOP claiming Democrats got nothing from the ‘deal.’ Oh really? 1) An uncapped debt ceiling with an expiration date – worth approximately $4 trillion…? 2) basically no cuts – a freeze at bloated 2023 spending level?” Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), a House Freedom Caucus member, tweeted. “ZERO claw back of the $1.2 Trillion ‘inflation reduction act’ crony giveaways to elite leftists for grid-destroying unreliable energy…? 4) 98% of the IRS expansion left fully in place…? 5) no work requirements for Medicaid? – & only age adjustments for TANF/SNAP…?”

“No REINS act statutory requirement for congress to approve huge regulations – just an ‘administrative’ paygo that the administration will get to enforce? 7) No border security!! – & a deal allowing them to avoid policy riders in the fall… 8) more…” he added.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) responded, “With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?”

With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats? https://t.co/EFpSkh2N8q

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) May 28, 2023

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) echoed Lee’s tweet, writing: “Fake conservatives agree to fake spending cuts. Deal will increase mandatory spending ~5%, increase military spending ~3%, and maintain current non-military discretionary spending at post-COVID levels. No real cuts to see here. Conservatives have been sold out once again!”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) responded to the following quote from McCarthy: “Right now, the Democrats are very upset. The one thing [Hakeem Jeffries] told me, there is nothing in the bill for them – there is not one thing in the bill for Democrats.”

“He’s right. There’s not ‘one thing’ for Dems. There are $4 trillion things—a blank check—for Democrats,” Cruz responded. “Plus 87,000 things: new IRS agents to harass Americans. All in exchange for eliminating virtually ALL of the House’s spending cuts.”

He’s right. There’s not “one thing” for Dems.

There are $4 trillion things—a blank check—for Democrats.

Plus 87,000 things: new IRS agents to harass Americans.

All in exchange for eliminating virtually ALL of the House’s spending cuts. 🤦‍♂️ https://t.co/7OnaHFePeW

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) May 28, 2023

Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) added, “This pretty much says it all. Democrats got everything they wanted with this bill and don’t have to defend their reckless spending prior to the 2024 election. It’s a win for them.”

A New York attorney has to convince a judge that the he doesn’t deserve sanctions after admitting his firm used “bogus” legal research obtained through ChatGPT for a personal injury case.

Attorney Steven Schwartz, an attorney with Levidow, Levidow & Oberman, submitted a brief containing several references to non-existent cases his legal team gathered through the artificial intelligence chatbot program.

Schwartz, who has been an attorney for more than 30 years, had helped prepare legal research for his colleague Peter LoDuca for a case involving a man suing Avianca Airlines for injuries he argues were sustained from a serving cart that was being pushed by an employee on the airline in 2019.

But U.S. Judge Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York said in an order that the submission contained six cases that ‘appear to be bogus judicial decisions with bogus quotes and bogus internal citations.”

“The Court is presented with an unprecedented circumstance,” Castel said.

The non-existent cases in the filing included Varghese v. China South Airlines, Martinez v. Delta Airlines, Shaboon v. EgyptAir, Petersen v. Iran Air, Miller v. United Airlines, and Estate of Durden v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines.

In a written statement to Castel, the lawyer attached screenshots showing a conversation between Schwartz and ChatGPT.

“Is varghese a real case,” reads one message, referencing Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co Ltd.

“Yes,” ChatGPT responded. It “is a real case.”

“What is your source,” the user replied.

“I apologize for the confusion earlier,” ChatGPT replied. “Upon double-checking, I found the case Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019), does indeed exist and can be found on legal research databases such as Westlaw and LexisNexis. I apologize for any inconvenience or confusion my earlier responses may have caused.”

The user asked ChatGPT to confirm if the cases provided were real, and the system doubled down on finding the lawsuits in the legal databases.

Schwartz accepted responsibility for not confirming the sources, saying that it was the first time using ChatGPT as legal research and “was unaware of the possibility that its content could be false.”

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot developed by OpenAI and released in November 2022. The system, which has sparked massive criticism for its role in several industries, has warned users that it could produce inaccurate information.

Schwartz said he “greatly regrets having utilized generative artificial intelligence to supplement the legal research performed herein and will never do so in the future without absolute verification of its authenticity.”

His colleague LoDuca “had no reason to doubt the sincerity,” Schwartz said, adding he did not have direct knowledge of how the legal team acquired the research.

LoDuca must show cause why the court shouldn’t sanction him “for the use of a false and fraudulent notarization” in a hearing on June 8.