In a rural county in West Texas, the justice system is running out of voices.
What once was a team of eight court reporters is now down to six — and that number is about to shrink even more. In a neighboring county, six positions will be reduced to four by the end of this year. Judges are scrambling. Reporters are stretching themselves thin to fill gaps. And despite a public job posting on MyTexasCSR.com, one local district court has received zero applicants. Now, that court is in talks with Verbatim to install digital recording equipment.
This isn’t a staffing issue. It’s a crisis.
And it’s not just happening in West Texas — it’s happening across the country. Courts are defaulting to digital not because it’s better, but because they believe it’s the only option. But is it?
What “No Options” Really Means
The phrase “there are no other options” is often used to justify a downgrade in service — in this case, swapping licensed professionals for microphones and software. But that phrase does something dangerous: it erases the real, human professionals who are still here, still willing, and still fighting to do this work.
The reporters in these counties haven’t disappeared. They’re stepping in where they can — but they’re exhausted, overwhelmed, and unsupported. “Some of us are filling in when needed,” says Melissa, a reporter in West Texas, “but it’s unsustainable.”
And she’s right. A patchwork of temporary help isn’t a solution. It’s a warning flare.
Digital Recording Isn’t a Fix — It’s a Gamble
When courts install digital recording systems, they often treat it as a neutral change — a technical upgrade, a budget-friendly solution. But here’s what they’re not telling the public:
- No one is certifying the record.
- There’s no one to read back.
- There’s no accountability for errors.
In criminal court, that can mean the difference between freedom and incarceration. In civil court, it can cost parties tens of thousands in misinterpreted testimony. And in every case, it undermines public trust in the integrity of our legal system.
Microphones don’t create transcripts. People do. And the fewer people we have in those roles, the more broken our records become.
Why Are Reporters Leaving?
Let’s be honest: court reporting is a demanding profession that requires certification, continuous education, and skill. But when states fail to promote training, refuse to invest in student recruitment, and allow digital vendors to undercut the profession, reporters have little incentive to stay — let alone recommend the field to others.
In Texas, there are talented reporters willing to work — but they can’t cover every courtroom across every county without backup. And the younger generation isn’t stepping in fast enough, because we’ve failed to show them that this is a future worth pursuing.
What Needs to Change
We need a coordinated, national effort to:
- Tie ASR/digital tools to licensed professionals only — so that machines don’t replace people, but instead serve them.
- Fund court reporting programs and student support — especially in rural areas where the talent pipeline has dried up.
- Document and expose the consequences of digital-only solutions — because the public deserves to know the risks.
- Pass legislation state by state to define who is authorized to produce a legal record.
Most importantly, we need to push back against the false narrative that “there are no options.”
There are always options — they just require investment, vision, and will.
Melissa’s Message
Melissa’s story is just one of many, but it highlights the urgency of this moment. The decisions being made in small counties today will ripple across our entire judicial system tomorrow. And unless we act now, we may not have any qualified record keepers left to bear witness.
“I appreciate all you do,” she wrote. “Thank you for fighting the good fight.”
Let’s keep fighting — for Melissa, for Texas, and for every courtroom on the brink of silence.
Disclaimer
The content of this post is intended for informational and discussion purposes only. All opinions expressed herein are those of the author and are based on publicly available information, industry standards, and good-faith concerns about nonprofit governance and professional ethics. No part of this article is intended to defame, accuse, or misrepresent any individual or organization. Readers are encouraged to verify facts independently and to engage constructively in dialogue about leadership, transparency, and accountability in the court reporting profession.
- The content on this blog represents the personal opinions, observations, and commentary of the author. It is intended for editorial and journalistic purposes and is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
- Nothing here constitutes legal advice. Readers are encouraged to review the facts and form independent conclusions.
***To unsubscribe, just smash that UNSUBSCRIBE button below — yes, the one that’s universally glued to the bottom of every newsletter ever created. It’s basically the “Exit” sign of the email world. You can’t miss it. It looks like this (brace yourself for the excitement):
STENOIMPERIUM 
Yes, and I have a future niece who has tried multiple times to pass the Texas test, but with the solitary schooling we have online, very little help from any testing facilitators, she’s still not passed it. She’s in West Texas and has been working as a freelance reporter, but guess what! The agency isn’t paying her until THEY GET PAID! I’ve beat the drum dead for her to change agencies. Granted, there are only two in Lubbock, Texas. And I recommended her to the first one because I worked there as a new reporter 40 years ago. But no way, Jose, would I ever be waiting six, seven, eight months to get paid when they do!
She “feels bad” because they helped her get a writer. WE’LL HELP YOU GET A WRITER! She would fill that courtroom in Plainview, Texas, in a heartbeat if she could get some help, any help, to pass the test. Seriously, the first three times, it had to do with hardware issues and software issues. She can never get any help, and the Texas CRA is who is now administering the test!
Granted, I’m in So Cal and not there for every move she’s made. She felt really good the last time she took the test about a month ago, but I haven’t heard a word since. And she’s done a lot better on her tests after having been out in the field in the apprentice role or their licensure that allows for certain type of work to be taken by high speed students. She’s a magnum steno writer, so she’s got what it takes!
😡
~Reagan
“Never stop doing your best just because someone doesn’t give you credit.”
LikeLike
There is an entire National organization of certified digital reporters, i.e. Not Recorders, named AAERT. The American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers at aaert.org. Peruse the website of ethics, bylaws, policies and procedures, testing protocol with the Best Practices Guide of 285 pages, from which the test is administered, which must be mastered to pass the Test. So if you are having court reporter shortages, you may wish to investigate this opportunity that has been around since 1985. They may be able to help with your backlog.
LikeLike
Thank you for sharing the AAERT resource—it’s clear you’re invested in solutions to the court reporter shortage, and I appreciate the engagement.
That said, it’s important to address a critical distinction: AAERT-certified digital reporters are not equivalent to certified stenographic court reporters. Not in function, not in training, and certainly not in the legal protections they offer.
Let’s clarify a few key points:
1. Digital Reporter ≠ Live Verbatim Court Reporter
AAERT certifies electronic recorders and transcriptionists, not realtime, live verbatim reporters. Their role is to operate recording equipment and transcribe audio after the fact. There is no realtime feedback, no way to interrupt, clarify, or fix errors on the record as they happen. In a legal setting—where one wrong word can upend an appeal or misrepresent a sworn statement—that distinction is crucial.
2. A 285-Page Manual Is Not a Substitute for Years of Training
Stenographic court reporters undergo years of rigorous training, often passing state and national certification exams that test realtime accuracy at 225+ words per minute. Many specialize in realtime captioning, legal and medical terminology, and software-based transcript delivery. While AAERT’s 285-page guide may provide helpful structure for transcription standards, it doesn’t replicate the depth or skill required to produce a certified, instantaneous legal record.
3. Chain of Custody and Integrity of the Record
With a stenographer, the legal record is created in real time, by a neutral officer of the court, under oath. There’s no question about who captured what, or when. With digital recording, there’s often a multi-step chain—the person who recorded it isn’t the one transcribing it. That introduces opportunity for error, data corruption, or mistrust in the authenticity of the record.
4. Attorneys and Judges Are Not Requesting More Digital—They Want More Stenos
This article is not about a lack of awareness of alternatives—it’s about the unacceptable lowering of standards in the name of convenience. The legal professionals in West Texas are not asking for digital recorders. They’re asking for certified, live, trained court reporters. And when there are none available, they’re reluctantly turning to fallback options—not because they want to, but because they feel they have no choice.
5. We Need to Preserve and Invest in a Gold-Standard Profession
Replacing a gold standard with a lower one because of temporary shortages is a short-sighted solution with long-term consequences. Instead, we need to invest in recruitment, education, and retention for certified stenographers and voicewriters—fields that are actively growing with new students and modernized training tools.
In short: I appreciate your perspective, but this article was written precisely because “stopgap” solutions like digital recording are being used to justify the dismantling of a profession that plays a critical role in justice.
We need more certified stenographers, not fewer.
And we need support for the infrastructure that makes that possible—not acceptance of replacements that don’t meet the same legal, ethical, or professional standard.
Thank you again for engaging in this important conversation.
LikeLike