Court reporting associations are facing a reckoning. Reporters are not disengaging because they dislike the profession; they are disengaging because their associations no longer align with their most urgent priorities: jobs, advancement, training, and real career security. In an era of technological disruption and shrinking pipelines, associations that fail to become career catalysts risk losing not just members, but the future of the profession itself.
Tag Archives: ccra
A Harbinger of Collapse – What One Facebook Post Reveals About the Future of Court Reporting in the United States
A single Facebook post from a Canadian reporter—reduced to just 3–6 jobs a month—should terrify every U.S. attorney and stenographer. It is a glimpse of what happens when ASR replaces certified professionals: the market collapses, accuracy disappears, and justice erodes. Canada didn’t fail because reporters weren’t skilled. It failed because decision-makers chased “cost savings.” The U.S. is next—unless we stop it now.
The Trojan Horse Problem – Why Software Companies Should Not Masquerade as Court Reporting Agencies
Software companies moving into the court reporting agency space do not represent innovation; they represent structural risk. When the same platform controls the technology, the data, and the labor pipeline, independence erodes and normalization begins. The danger is not sudden replacement but gradual acceptance, until reporters become optional upgrades instead of guardians of the record. The profession must recognize this encroachment and defend its sovereignty.
Where Your CEU Dollars Go – Choosing State Associations and Nonprofits That Reinvest in the Profession
Every continuing education dollar is a decision about the future of court reporting. When those funds are directed to legitimate state associations and nonprofit organizations, they strengthen advocacy, education, and ethical standards that preserve the integrity of the record. When they flow instead to personality-driven ventures, the profession risks becoming a revenue stream for individual ambition rather than a sustained legacy built on collective stewardship.
When Disclosure Isn’t Enough – Why AB 711 Doesn’t Serve Court Reporters or Access to Justice
AB 711 claims to curb “reporter waste,” but it’s a paperwork fix for a resource crisis. Mandating disclosure of who will hire a court reporter doesn’t solve shortages, improve access, or strengthen the profession—it risks normalizing hearings without certified stenographers. California needs investment in reporters, not bureaucracy that treats them as optional.
Credentials vs. Competence – Rethinking Professional Standards in Court Reporting
Court reporting’s future depends on more than letters after our names. Credentials have value, but without strong state licensure, standardized titles, and real enforcement, they offer no structural protection. As attorneys push back on “high rates” and cheaper labor undercuts skilled reporters, the profession must unify around measurable skill, fair rates, and regulatory strength—not voluntary designations.
The Stars That Sing – Hearing the Truth in Court Reporting
The Bushmen pitied Laurens van der Post when he admitted he could not hear the stars sing. Today, I feel the same grief for our profession. The truth rings out—schools reporting poaching, leaders failing in accountability—yet so many refuse to hear it. Our poverty is not material, but in losing the ability to hear the song of truth itself.
When Recruitment Crosses the Line – Court Reporting Schools Push Back After DRA Event
California court reporting schools are pushing back after the last DRA conference, where a speaker allegedly recruited students directly out of their programs—even inside private Teams accounts. One 200-wpm student on the verge of the CSR was lost. School leaders say enough is enough: associations must protect students from solicitation if they want them in the room.
The Language of CCP 2093(a) & Why Notaries Are Not Deposition Officers
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2093(a) names notaries and deposition officers as able to administer oaths—but only certified shorthand reporters are authorized to take testimony and certify transcripts. The “notary loophole” misleads attorneys into believing oaths alone make a deposition valid. Without a CSR, the record collapses. Learn why due process demands stenographers—not shortcuts.
AB 711 Passed—But Is It Really a Win? Why This New Law Signals the Next Phase in the Elimination of Certified Court Reporters
When a judge tells attorneys they “don’t need a court reporter”—despite one being present and assigned—the threat to justice becomes undeniable. AB 711 enables this erosion, shifting the burden of preserving the record onto attorneys while courts quietly sideline certified reporters. The result? Trials with no transcript, no appeal, and no accountability. This isn’t modernization. It’s judicial overreach.
The Manufactured Court Reporter ‘Crisis’ and the Dangerous Push for Unlicensed Transcription
The myth of a court reporter shortage is being exploited to push unlicensed transcription services into the legal system. But only certified court reporters—not agencies or transcriptionists—can serve as the Responsible Charge. They alone have the authority to certify transcripts, administer oaths, and safeguard the record. Replacing them with unqualified labor threatens due process and undermines the very foundation of courtroom integrity.
The California Court Reporting Crisis and How the System Undermines Its Own Professionals
California court reporters are being edged out as agencies prioritize out-of-state labor for remote jobs—often at the expense of legal compliance. Despite clear transcript standards, violations go unchecked due to the CRB’s lack of enforcement authority. Without reforms to licensing, job assignment transparency, and regulatory power, California’s reporting professionals face burnout, underemployment, and a system that no longer supports the high standards it claims to uphold.
California’s AB 882 – A Temporary Solution or a Trojan Horse?
California’s AB 882 aims to address the court reporter shortage by temporarily allowing electronic recordings, but its vague language on “good-faith” hiring efforts leaves room for abuse. Without clear standards, the bill risks becoming a Trojan horse for permanent electronic recording. Real solutions require accountability, innovation, and long-term investment—not a short-term fix that could undermine human court reporting forever.
The Case Against Electronic Recording: Protecting the Integrity of the Judicial Record
The reliance on electronic recording threatens the accuracy and integrity of court records, undermining the role of certified court reporters. Unlike live reporters, digital recordings can suffer from technical failures, inaudible speech, and misinterpretations, jeopardizing appellate review. The push for electronic recording prioritizes cost-cutting over justice, ignoring the critical need for precise, verbatim transcripts in high-stakes cases such as family law and probate disputes.
Is the Court Reporting Shortage Real or Manufactured
Court reporters continue to debate whether the industry is facing a real shortage or a retention crisis. Experts argue that the so-called shortage is a manufactured issue, fueled by outdated studies and profit-driven motives favoring digital alternatives. Low wages, lack of mentorship, and rising production costs contribute to retention struggles. Without proactive solutions like better pay and training programs, the profession risks decline, impacting the legal system’s accuracy and efficiency.
STENOIMPERIUM 