When most people think about access to justice, they think about the right to an attorney, a fair trial, or an impartial jury. But there’s a quieter right that underpins all of those: the right to an accurate record of what happened in court.
Without a verbatim transcript, a litigant’s ability to appeal a decision, no matter how unjust, is severely compromised. And right now, a nationwide court reporter shortage is leaving millions of proceedings without any record at all. Judge Samantha P. Jessner ruled this violates the constitutions of the United States and the State of California.
Digital court recording technology is emerging as the solution that preserves due process, protects appeal rights, and ensures every person who walks into a courtroom gets equal treatment under the law.
The court reporter workforce is shrinking rapidly. According to the 2025 Court Reporting Industry Trends Report released by the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers (AAERT), the stenographer workforce has declined by 21 percent over the last decade, with just 23,000 stenographers remaining nationwide. Enrollment in stenography schools has plummeted by 74 percent, and nearly half of all programs have closed.
The impact is being felt across the country:
California: Over 1.7 million hearings have proceeded without a verbatim record since 2023, according to data from the Judicial Branch of California. Judges and legal advocates have called it a “constitutional crisis.”
New York: More than 220 court reporter vacancies remain unfilled statewide, roughly a fifth of all budgeted positions, according to data from the Office of Court Administration.
Texas: Rural counties struggle to compete with metro salaries of $100,000 or more, while freelance reporters can earn upward of $250,000. Some counties have gone over a year without a single applicant for their court reporter position.
Nationally: 76 percent of legal professionals surveyed cite scheduling difficulties as the biggest challenge caused by the shortage, while 55 percent report increased costs.
The shortage is not a future threat. It is today’s reality, and it is disproportionately affecting the people who can least afford it.
The court reporter shortage doesn’t affect everyone equally. When a court lacks courtroom technology, the proceedings still happen, they just happen without a record. And without a record, the right to appeal is effectively erased.
In many jurisdictions, litigants who can afford to hire a private court reporter at their own expense can still secure a verbatim transcript. Those who cannot, which includes the vast majority of self-represented litigants, families in custody disputes, and individuals seeking protective orders, are left without one.
This creates a two-tiered justice system: one for those who can pay for the record, and one for everyone else.
The types of hearings most affected by the court reporter shortage are often those involving the most vulnerable members of society. In juvenile courts, the unrecorded proceedings include child dependency hearings, termination of parental rights, delinquency adjudications, and foster care placement reviews.
These are not just administrative hurdles. They involve the fundamental rights of children and the legal sanctity of the family unit. When a juvenile court record is incomplete or non-existent:
When these hearings go unrecorded, the most vulnerable people in the legal system lose their loudest voice in the eyes of the law.
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10 defines what constitutes the record on appeal in federal courts. Under Rule 10(a), the record consists of three components: the original papers and exhibits filed in the district court, the transcript of proceedings, and a certified copy of the docket entries.
The transcript is where the substance lives. It captures testimony, objections, judicial rulings, and the exchanges that form the basis for any appeal.
Rule 10(b)(2) is especially significant. It states that if an appellant intends to argue that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by or contrary to the evidence, they must include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to that finding or conclusion. Without a transcript, the court of appeals has no basis for review. The original decision stands.
When no recording exists, Rule 10(c) allows appellants to prepare a “statement of the evidence” from the best available means, including their own recollection. This statement is subject to objection by the opposing party and must be approved by the district court.
In practice, asking a court to rely on one party’s memory of what happened is a dramatically weaker foundation for appeal than a verbatim, timestamped transcript. State courts have reached similar conclusions. California appellate courts have held that where no reporter’s transcript is provided, the trial court’s judgment must be “conclusively presumed correct.”
Digital court recording ensures that Rule 10(c) never needs to be invoked. When a court has a digital recording system in place, every proceeding is captured in real time, creating a complete and searchable verbatim record, whether a stenographic court reporter is available or not.
Multi-channel audio recording that captures every speaker clearly, even in busy courtrooms.
Real-time AI transcription so judges and staff can follow a live text display during proceedings.
AI-powered post-session transcription that generates accurate, timestamped transcripts at a fraction of the cost and turnaround of traditional methods.
Annotation and readback tools that allow court staff to search, mark, and reference specific moments in the record.
Redundant backup systems that protect the record against technical failure.
State legislatures are taking notice. In Texas, SB 1538 was introduced in the 89th Legislature to formally recognize digital court recorders as official court reporters in counties with populations under 125,000. In California, legal advocates have filed suit arguing that the failure to provide verbatim records in civil hearings violates litigants’ constitutional rights. The California Supreme Court accepted the case, signaling its recognition of the issue’s significance.
Legislative efforts like Texas SB 1538 signal a turning point. By commissioning a formal study into digital court reporting, lawmakers are recognizing that technology isn't just an alternative, it's a necessary tool to ensure every litigant, regardless of wealth, has access to a verbatim record.
The AAERT’s 2025 report urges legal stakeholders to support regulatory updates that remove barriers to digital reporting, expand certification programs, and modernize court reporting infrastructure. The direction of the industry is clear: courts that adopt digital recording now are positioning themselves to serve their communities better, faster, and more equitably.
For court administrators and judges concerned about the impact of the reporter shortage on their communities, the path forward is straightforward:
Audit your current coverage. How many courtrooms or hearing types are currently proceeding without a verbatim record? This is your baseline.
Evaluate digital recording solutions. Look for systems purpose-built for courtroom use with multi-channel recording, annotation tools, and AI transcription capabilities.
Position digital recording as a complement. This is not about replacing staff. It's about ensuring the record exists in every proceeding, every time.
Act now. Every day a hearing goes unrecorded is a day someone’s appeal rights may be compromised.
Modernizing your courtroom doesn't require a staff overhaul. SoniClear is designed to be operated by existing court clerks with minimal additional training. By implementing digital technology and professional hardware, court administrators can guarantee that the voices of the most vulnerable are preserved for the record. SoniClear is the tool that ensures "equal treatment under the law" isn't just a phrase on a courthouse wall, but a daily reality.
Digital court recording isn't just a technical upgrade, it's now a fundamental safeguard for due process. By embracing these solutions today, we ensure that every person leaves the courtroom with their rights, and their record, fully intact. Contact our team for a consultation to review your courtroom needs.
Sources:
American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers (AAERT). 2025 Court Reporting Industry Trends Report. aaert.org/industry-report
Judicial Branch of California. Shortage of Court Reporters in California. courts.ca.gov/shortage-court-reporters-california
Gothamist. Shortage of Court Reporters Could Slow Down New York’s Court System. gothamist.com (May 2024)
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 10: The Record on Appeal. law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_10
Texas Legislature, 89th Session. SB 1538: Registration and Regulation of Court Recorders. capitol.texas.gov
Bay Area Legal Aid. Court Reporter Shortage FAQ. baylegal.org/court-reporter-shortage-faq/