LO
DeploymentCognitive automation2023-11-03
Sound recording has been authorised in US federal courts since January 1984, and bankruptcy courts have no official court reporters, judiciary policy states
Court reporteroccupation page →
Event date / reported
2023-11-03
Evidence stage
DeploymentAn employer has put it into production. Can move the baseline — weighted by scale and how similar the setting is.
Tasks this bears on
Recording court proceedings
Capturing every word of a hearing as it happens.
Automating✓ Evidence-backed
Where this applies
United States federal courts. The policy guide records that in 1983 the Judicial Conference authorised electronic sound recording of court proceedings, effective January 1984, and says that bankruptcy courts ordinarily use electronic sound recording and there are no official court reporters in bankruptcy courts; district judges choose the recording method. This is recording, not speech recognition, and the guide does not count proceedings by method.
What this means
In a whole class of US federal courts, the stenographer's capture role was taken by audio recording decades ago — automation of this task that predates AI.
What it does not yet show
Federal policy only; recording still needs people to monitor it and to produce transcripts.
What you can check
Open the Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 6, and find "there are no official court reporters in bankruptcy courts".
Does it change the assessment?
No. The impact index is never moved by a single event. Nor did this record change a layer: all 1 linked judgement above already rested on earlier evidence. This one adds to them.
Source
Judicial Conference of the United States / Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts — Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 6: Court Reporting (chapter 3 last revised, Transmittal 06-019, November 3, 2023) · verified 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent) · interpreted 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent)
Primary source — published by the party that did this, or the authority of record. No co-signature needed.