LO
Court reporter — tasks, one by one
The unit of analysis is the task, not the job title. Each one below carries its direction, whether the judgement rests on evidence or on platform inference, the reasoning, and what it does not establish.
Every task on this page#
Recording court proceedings
Automating✓ Evidence-backedCapturing every word of a hearing as it happens.
Audio recording has taken this task in many courts, long before AI. US federal law allows proceedings to be recorded by shorthand, mechanical means, electronic sound recording or any other method; the federal judiciary authorised sound recording from January 1984, and there are no official court reporters in bankruptcy courts. In Los Angeles, a court facing a net loss of 117 reporters since 2018 ordered electronic recording where no reporter is available. California law, though, allows recording only in limited civil, misdemeanor and infraction cases.
Rules and one court's order; recording is not speech recognition, and none of this counts how many proceedings are recorded each way.
Producing and editing transcripts
Being augmented≈ Platform inferenceTurning the record into an accurate written transcript.
Speech recognition is being tested here, with people editing its output. The UK's Ministry of Justice is studying whether its in-house AI could meet required accuracy standards for Crown Court transcripts, which contracted providers produce today. Researchers transcribing UK Supreme Court hearings found generic cloud speech recognition's word error rate remains relatively high on courtroom audio; their gold-standard transcripts were made by legal professionals post-editing machine output. US projections say court reporters will continue to be needed to review and edit digitally produced documentation.
A government study that has not reported, a research paper with a commercial partner and a projection; none measures how many transcript hours moved to machines.
Swearing in and certifying the record
Still human-led✓ Evidence-backedSwearing in witnesses and certifying that a transcript is accurate.
The law ties the record's authority to a person. Under US federal law, the reporter or other individual designated to produce the record attaches the official certificate. In Queensland, a transcription produced by a recorder — a person who carries out a recording service — is received as evidence. A California bill that would have let certified digital reporters swear in witnesses and capture the record died in January 2026.
The law of three jurisdictions, one of them only as a bill that failed; other countries and states set their own rules.
Reporting depositions
Still human-led≈ Platform inferenceRecording sworn testimony taken outside court for litigation.
In California, the law requires depositions to be recorded stenographically by a certified shorthand reporter, except as specified: a bill that would have allowed certified digital recorders as well died in January 2026. No record here measures how depositions are recorded elsewhere.
One state's law, read through a failed bill's digest; other states and countries allow other methods.
Live captioning
Automating≈ Platform inferenceWriting live text of speech for broadcasts, events and people with hearing loss.
US projections say transcription generated by AI tools is expected to dampen employment demand for simultaneous captioners, even as captioning is needed for people with hearing loss. A court transcription vendor describes its AI-driven voice capture and transcription services.
A projection and a vendor's description of its own service; no record here measures captioning quality or jobs.