The War Against Women in the Courts: How Judges Are Targeting Female Court Reporters

Posted bystenoimperiumPosted inCourt ReportingTags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In an era where women have fought tirelessly for equality and economic independence, one profession remains a stronghold of female dominance: court reporting. A staggering 90%+ of court reporters are women, and they play a crucial role in the justice system by producing accurate, verbatim transcripts of legal proceedings. However, judges and court administrators are increasingly working to eliminate this profession, not due to inefficiency or obsolescence, but because these women earn a wage that rivals—or even surpasses—that of the very judges they serve. The result is a coordinated effort to replace them with electronic recording technology, threatening not only the livelihoods of thousands of women but also the integrity of the legal system itself.

The Backbone of the Legal System

Court reporters are the unsung heroes of the courtroom. Their work ensures that every spoken word in a trial, deposition, or hearing is preserved with unmatched accuracy. These transcripts serve as the official record, protecting the rights of defendants, victims, and attorneys alike. Unlike automated recording systems, which are prone to malfunctions, misinterpretations, and inaudible gaps, human court reporters provide real-time transcription, immediate clarifications, and corrections when necessary. Their skill and expertise are irreplaceable, yet the judiciary seems determined to phase them out.

The Economic Factor: Resentment from the Bench

One of the primary reasons judges and court administrators are eager to replace court reporters is economic. Many court reporters, through their specialized skill set and ability to take on freelance work, can earn six-figure salaries. Meanwhile, judges, who often hold law degrees and wield significant power, find themselves making comparable or even lower salaries. This has bred resentment among certain judges who believe that these women should not be earning as much—or more—than they do.

Instead of acknowledging the value that court reporters bring to the judicial process, some judges have resorted to dismantling the profession, lobbying for electronic recording systems under the guise of modernization and cost-cutting. However, these systems are not only unreliable but often end up costing more in the long run due to technical failures and the need for extensive post-recording transcription by human workers.

The Flaws of Electronic Recording

Electronic recording is being touted as a cost-saving measure, but the reality is far different. These systems are plagued with problems, including:

  • Poor Audio Quality: Background noise, overlapping speech, and heavy accents make recordings difficult to understand.
  • Equipment Failures: Malfunctions can result in missing testimony, jeopardizing entire cases.
  • Lack of Immediate Clarifications: Unlike a live court reporter, a machine cannot ask a witness to repeat a statement or clarify a mumble.
  • Delayed Transcripts: Instead of real-time transcripts, audio recordings must be transcribed later, often by underpaid workers with less expertise, leading to errors and inconsistencies.

Despite these issues, courts across the country are moving forward with the implementation of electronic recording, seemingly unconcerned with the accuracy and reliability of the judicial record. The result? Appeals based on inaccurate transcripts, delays in justice, and a decline in overall courtroom efficiency.

Who Benefits from This Change?

If electronic recording systems are so flawed, why are judges and court administrators pushing for them? The answer lies in power and control. Judges who push for automation are effectively eliminating a highly paid, independent profession dominated by women and replacing it with a system they can oversee directly. By removing court reporters, they not only reduce the number of women earning substantial wages but also create a power structure where the accuracy of court records is dictated by technology they control rather than by trained professionals.

Moreover, private companies that manufacture and service electronic recording equipment stand to profit enormously from this shift. The transition from human court reporters to machines is not about efficiency or cost—it is about redistributing financial resources from skilled women to corporate interests and government budgets.

The Impact on Women

The push to replace court reporters disproportionately affects women, as they make up nearly the entire workforce in this field. These are women who have spent years training and honing their skills, often investing tens of thousands of dollars in specialized education. Many are single mothers or primary breadwinners who depend on their income to support their families. By phasing out this profession, the courts are effectively stripping thousands of women of their financial independence and forcing them into lower-paying, less secure jobs.

This is not just a fight for jobs—it is a fight for women’s economic autonomy. The judiciary, which should be upholding fairness and equality, is instead engaging in systemic economic discrimination, reinforcing outdated gender norms that undervalue women’s labor and professional achievements.

The Resistance: Fighting Back Against Injustice

Fortunately, court reporters are not taking this assault on their profession lying down. Across the country, advocacy groups, professional organizations, and individual court reporters are pushing back. They are lobbying legislators, educating the public on the risks of electronic recording, and exposing the financial and ethical motivations behind the push for automation.

Several states have already seen legal challenges and legislative efforts to protect human court reporters. In some instances, judges and attorneys themselves have resisted the transition, citing concerns over transcript accuracy and procedural fairness. However, the battle is far from over.

The public must recognize the broader implications of this shift. This is not just about court reporters—it is about preserving the integrity of the judicial system and standing against systemic discrimination that seeks to undermine women in the workforce.

A Call to Action

The courts’ attack on female court reporters is a blatant attempt to devalue a profession dominated by women, not because it is outdated or inefficient, but because it allows women to earn a decent living. The push for electronic recording is driven by economic envy, corporate interests, and a desire to control the legal record. If left unchecked, this transition will not only harm thousands of women but also compromise the accuracy and fairness of the legal system itself.

It is time to fight back. Legislators, attorneys, and the public must stand with court reporters to protect their jobs and the integrity of the justice system. We must demand that our courts prioritize accuracy, fairness, and the skilled professionals who make our legal system work. The war against women in the courts is real, but with awareness and action, it is a battle that can be won.

Published by stenoimperium

We exist to facilitate the fortifying of the Stenography profession and ensure its survival for the next hundred years! As court reporters, we've handed the relationship role with our customers, or attorneys, over to the agencies and their sales reps.  This has done a lot of damage to our industry.  It has taken away our ability to have those relationships, the ability to be humanized and valued.  We've become a replaceable commodity. Merely saying we are the “Gold Standard” tells them that we’re the best, but there are alternatives.  Who we are though, is much, much more powerful than that!  We are the Responsible Charge.  “Responsible Charge” means responsibility for the direction, control, supervision, and possession of stenographic & transcription work, as the case may be, to assure that the work product has been critically examined and evaluated for compliance with appropriate professional standards by a licensee in the profession, and by sealing and signing the documents, the professional stenographer accepts responsibility for the stenographic or transcription work, respectively, represented by the documents and that applicable stenographic and professional standards have been met.  This designation exists in other professions, such as engineering, land surveying, public water works, landscape architects, land surveyors, fire preventionists, geologists, architects, and more.  In the case of professional engineers, the engineering association adopted a Responsible Charge position statement that says, “A professional engineer is only considered to be in responsible charge of an engineering work if the professional engineer makes independent professional decisions regarding the engineering work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional engineer’s physical presence at the location where the engineering work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the engineering work.” If we were to adopt a Responsible Charge position statement for our industry, we could start with a draft that looks something like this: "A professional court reporter, or stenographer, is only considered to be in responsible charge of court reporting work if the professional court reporter makes independent professional decisions regarding the court reporting work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional court reporter’s physical presence at the location where the court reporting work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the court reporting work.” Shared purpose The cornerstone of a strategic narrative is a shared purpose. This shared purpose is the outcome that you and your customer are working toward together. It’s more than a value proposition of what you deliver to them. Or a mission of what you do for the world. It’s the journey that you are on with them. By having a shared purpose, the relationship shifts from consumer to co-creator. In court reporting, our mission is “to bring justice to every litigant in the U.S.”  That purpose is shared by all involved in the litigation process – judges, attorneys, everyone.  Who we are is the Responsible Charge.  How we do that is by Protecting the Record.

3 thoughts on “The War Against Women in the Courts: How Judges Are Targeting Female Court Reporters”

    1. Hi Todd,
      If you have a current stat for that, I’d love to know. But 30,000 professionals, and 3,000 are men, is the last info the NCRA has published, and I believe that was in 2014. I don’t have anything current. In fact, I don’t think anyone does, anywhere.

      Like

      Reply

      1. 89% or 90% was the last one I saw and it was later than 2014, but I would have to search for the source. And from providing CE to court reporters across the nation for over 15 years now, I can tell you for sure it is not 99%.

        Like

Leave a comment