“Nuance Matters” claimed U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as he spoke about the imperative need for the legal profession to proceed with “caution and humility” in its adoption of AI. The debates surrounding the usage of AI in the legal profession have mostly revolved around the displacement of labour. Additionally, there has been a rise in the discourse on the ethical use of AI by lawyers, requiring them to follow professional standards and ensure diligence in following the output of AI models. Judges have also not been immune to the effects of AI, with Lord Justice Birss of the Court of Appeals of England and Wales declaring the use of ChatGPT as “jolly useful”. Most jurisdictions have been trying to grapple with the effects of AI in the legal profession, with some banning the use of AI and automated decision-making tools entirely. Canada’s Federal Court, for instance, requires law clerks and judges to follow the principles of, inter alia, accountability, non-discrimination, accuracy, transparency, and having a “human in the loop”, while utilizing AI. These guiding principles for all members of the bar and the bench are important given the tendency of large language models (LLM) to hallucinate. With the proliferation of AI usage in courts, the role played by actors such as law clerks becomes critical. While the law clerks’ role differs in different jurisdictions, different courts, and under different judges, they broadly evaluate petitions, conduct legal research, assist in drafting, and prepare synopsis and case summaries. There is considerable overlap between the functions performed by the judge and the law clerks; therefore, the importance of this position cannot be understated. The position of a law clerk, while given its due credit in the U.S., is perceived as significantly lower in value in India and Nigeria. This perception results in only a minuscule number of law graduates applying for such positions, as they are essentially considered a stepping stone to rising in the legal profession. With the rise of AI and its corresponding usage in the legal profession, it becomes necessary to evaluate the role of law clerks in the digital landscape. This chapter argues that rather than AI displacing law clerks, as many scholars have pointed out, their labour would be invaluable in the current context. Conceivably, clerks would act as a firewall, assisting the judges not only in the traditional role of conducting legal research but also in weeding out hallucinated cases and propositions used by lawyers. This chapter aims to focus on two jurisdictions, namely India and Nigeria, as it delves into the invisible labour provided by law clerks. It highlights how the role of screening out hallucinations might bring visibility to their contributions, given that their role is frequently devalued in the legal profession within these jurisdictions.