The integration of AI in psychiatric and psychotherapeutic treatment has commenced. This integration is no longer a matter of whether or not AI should be implemented in treatment. Nor is there any question concerning whether embodied AI applications should or shouldn't function as sole treatment modalities, sans practitioner. Rather, the questions that remain surround the ethical and legal implications for related AI implementation. State licensing requirements and national regulatory boards currently mandate and govern practitioners' ethical and legal requirements. Logically, it stands to reason that the practitioner who implements AI in treatment would still be subject to state law, and any related board requirements. But what about AI treatment apps that may be developed overseas and used in treatment by either the patient or practitioner across state lines? Would any related legal fallout surrounding such issues constitute subject matter jurisdiction at the federal level, thereby potentially leaving federal ancillary jurisdiction decisions at the discretion of the federal court over state law? There is likely no legal precedent at either the state or federal level respective of AI implementation and treatment. Perhaps only one thing is certain; this change will broadly impact an array of individuals across occupations, both financially and legally.