As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly prevalent in critical decision-making domains such as recruitment, credit approval, and criminal justice, a pressing question emerges: when algorithms can predict human behavior more accurately than humans themselves, should we legislate restrictions on their autonomy in major decisions that shape individual destinies? This essay addresses the expansion of AI's "decision-making authority." I take a clear stance: AI must remain a decision-support tool, not an autonomous decision-maker, in matters of profound personal consequence. Its role should be bounded by human oversight, accountability, and the preservation of moral agency. Below, I substantiate this position with concrete real-world cases and potential scenarios.
