There seems to be a conflation between rules of access to judicial proceedings and requirements for access to information under either existing or hypothetical freedom of information statutes, or subpoenas for defense evidence in criminal cases.

Then there is the question of what constitutes adequate evidence when the computer systems in use are the result of training data combined with very simple blocks of code to produce over time complex states that are neither obvious from the code and the training data nor completely explicable by either the systems themselves or those who built them. But it is not clear also under what circumstances that's relevant. The route to improving the draft, I think, is to get closer to those questions.