As courts increasingly replace stenographic reporters with digital recording systems, the promise of efficiency collides with a harder truth: a recording is not the same as a reliable record. When equipment fails, speakers overlap, or entire proceedings go unrecorded, there is no safety net. The cost savings vanish quickly—leaving judges, attorneys, and litigants to reckon with what was lost.
Tag Archives: legalethics
When the Machine Gets It Wrong, Who Pays the Price?
Courts have been clear: artificial intelligence may assist lawyers, but it does not absolve them. When ASR systems miss testimony or AI summaries omit critical facts, responsibility does not vanish into the software. It lands squarely on the professionals who relied on it. As automation reshapes the legal record, a new reckoning over accountability is quietly approaching.
When Software Tries to Stand In for a License – Why ASR “Cleanup” Is Not Court Reporting
As courts embrace automated speech recognition, a critical question is being overlooked: who controls the legal record, and where does it live? Replacing licensed court reporters with cloud-based transcription and post-hoc “cleanup” introduces risks that go far beyond accuracy. From silent realtime edits to juror privacy in voir dire, the integrity of the record—and public trust in the justice system—are at stake.
Vendors Are Not Officers of the Court
Court reporting agencies schedule proceedings and process invoices—but they do not create the legal record. Yet some national agencies are now attaching corporate “company certificates” to deposition transcripts they did not take and cannot lawfully certify. This quiet shift blurs statutory boundaries, risks inadmissibility, and threatens due process by substituting branding for licensure in the creation of sworn testimony.
If You Want Lower Transcript Costs, Help Create More Court Reporters
Transcript prices are not rising because court reporters are greedy; they are rising because there are fewer of them. Like any market, court reporting follows basic economic rules: when supply shrinks and demand grows, prices increase. If attorneys want lower transcript costs, the solution is not cheaper capture methods—it is helping rebuild, retain, and respect the human court reporting workforce.
The Lessons of Badran – A Roadmap for How NCRA Must Defend the Legal Record
The Badran ruling exposed a growing risk: courts are redefining admissibility without guidance from the profession that creates the record. As audio-based reporting and vendor workflows spread, efficiency arguments are replacing evidentiary law. This article offers a clear roadmap for how NCRA can act—now, in active cases, and long-term—to defend due process, professional oversight, and the integrity of the record.
When the Record Becomes Elastic – Why Badran v. Badran Misunderstood Admissibility
Badran v. Badran exposes the danger of redefining testimony after the fact. In a remote deposition, a vendor-produced transcript was altered based on audio review, adding remarks not perceived in real time as testimony. Efficiency and stipulation cannot convert recordings into evidence. Without a licensed reporter in responsible charge, the record becomes elastic—and due process collapses.
When Efficiency Overrides the Law – Why Badran v. Badran Got Admissibility Wrong
The Badran v. Badran ruling did not affirm professionalism in modern depositions; it excused its absence. Admissibility does not turn on convenience, volume, or after-the-fact agreement. It turns on lawful process and qualified human oversight. Agencies are not officers of the record, and parties cannot stipulate away licensure, evidentiary foundation, or due process in the name of efficiency.
Petition to the National Court Reporters Association – In Re Stronger Regulatory Reforms for AI Innovation in Federal Court Proceedings
The integrity of the official court record is not a technology preference—it is a constitutional safeguard. This petition calls on the National Court Reporters Association to take a clearer, firmer position opposing AI-generated transcripts as the official record and to advocate for mandatory use of licensed stenographic court reporters to protect due process, accountability, and public trust in the justice system.
When Caution Becomes Capitulation – NCRA’s AI Filing and the Quiet Risk to the Court Record
As courts rush to embrace artificial intelligence, a quiet but consequential shift is underway. A recent federal submission by the National Court Reporters Association acknowledges AI’s flaws—yet stops short of drawing the line where it matters most. When caution replaces clarity, the integrity of the official court record, and the constitutional rights it protects, are placed at risk.
Celebration or Contradiction – When Corporate CEU’s Collide With the Reality of the Record
Corporate newsletters now celebrate “community” and “professional pride” while quietly advancing business models that make those same professionals optional. When private-equity-backed firms praise stenographers as essential yet invest in scalable digital replacements, the contradiction isn’t accidental — it’s strategic. Celebration becomes optics management, not advocacy, and reporters are left to reconcile flattering words with an economic reality moving in the opposite direction.
Using AI to Strengthen Your Voice – How Court Reporters Can Advocate Powerfully for Our Profession
AI isn’t here to replace court reporters—it’s here to amplify us. When used intentionally, AI becomes a strategic partner that helps reporters write stronger letters, clearer public comments, and more persuasive advocacy for our profession. It levels the playing field, giving every reporter the ability to speak with clarity, confidence, and impact. Your voice matters. AI simply helps the world hear it.
When the Machine Gets It Wrong, the Court Still Blames the Human
Courts across the country are delivering a blunt verdict on artificial intelligence: speed does not excuse accuracy. As lawyers face sanctions for AI-generated errors, judges are reaffirming an old rule in a new era—accountability remains human. In an age of automation, the certified court record and the professionals who create it have never mattered more.
When Practice Drifts From the Code – How Informal Norms Are Reshaping the Courtroom Record
In courtrooms nationwide, a quiet shift is underway. The rules governing the official record remain unchanged, yet everyday practice has drifted from the code. Realtime feeds and rough drafts, once tools for preparation, are increasingly treated as authoritative sources in high-stakes moments. This slow normalization of informality carries real legal risk—for attorneys, judges, and especially the reporters entrusted with preserving the record.
Who Trained the Machine?
AutoScript AI is marketed as a “legal-grade” AI transcription solution trained on “millions of hours of verified proceedings,” yet the company provides no public definition of what verification means in a legal context or where that data originated. Founded and led by technology executive Rene Arvin, the platform reflects a broader trend of general ASR tools being rebranded for legal use without the transparency traditionally required in court reporting.
Opinion | Digital Reporting Is Not “Clearly Lawful.” It Is Clearly Inferior — and Legally Dangerous
Digital reporting is not merely a different tool — it is a different evidentiary product. A transcript created after the fact from audio is reconstruction, not a contemporaneous verbatim record. Without licensed stenographic capture, individual accountability, and real-time certification, courts are left with hearsay dressed up as efficiency. The integrity of the record is not optional.
Trial Etiquette – The Unwritten Code Every Court Reporter Is Expected to Follow
Trial etiquette carries unwritten rules, and one of the strongest is this: if you accept a trial, you finish it. Leaving mid-trial hurts colleagues, judges, and even jurors—especially when readback requests arise and transcripts were never prepared. Substitute reporters are often handed unusable roughs or incomplete PDFs, creating risk of reversible error. Judges notice. Agencies remember. Professionalism demands continuity from start to finish.
Opinion: Texas Isn’t Confused About Digital Reporting — Only the Vendors Are
Texas is not confused about digital reporting — only the vendors are. Esquire, U.S. Legal, and Veritext recast a business model as a legal right, insisting courts ignore reliability gaps, nonexistent licensure, and the safeguards built directly into Rule 203.6. The trial court didn’t err; it exercised discretion. Corporate convenience is not access to justice, and marketing cannot replace a certified, accountable record.
Recording Roulette – When Courtroom Captures Become Costly Compromises
In courtrooms across the country, attorneys are increasingly encountering a problem they did not anticipate: they do not know whether their proceeding will be staffed by a certified stenographic reporter or by a digital recording operator until the matter is already underway. That uncertainty—once unthinkable in a profession built on procedural predictability—has become common inContinue reading “Recording Roulette – When Courtroom Captures Become Costly Compromises”
The First Impression Bias & How Female Court Reporters Are Judged on Appearance Before Skill
Women in court reporting are often judged on appearance long before anyone recognizes our skill. I’ve walked into rooms dressed like an attorney and still been mistaken for anything but the professional safeguarding the record. These subtle moments add up—and they reveal a deeper bias in the legal system. Our work deserves recognition based on expertise, not aesthetics.
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 Hidden Cost of Convenience – Are Cloud-Stored Transcripts Training AI Without Your Consent?
Cloud convenience comes with a hidden cost: many platforms quietly reserve the right to use or sell your synchronized transcripts and audio to train their AI. Whether or not AI is “inevitable” isn’t the point—consent is. Legal transcripts contain privileged, high-value data, and no reporter should unknowingly contribute to systems designed to replace them. Protecting the record means protecting our work.
The Weight of Watching- A Court Reporter’s Reflection When Justice Falters
Court reporters are trained to remain neutral observers, preserving the record without influence or intervention. Yet we also witness the moments when the justice system’s safeguards fail—when potential juror bias goes unexamined or judicial oversight falls short. We cannot raise concerns or redirect the process; our role is silence. The emotional toll comes from knowing what fairness requires, and watching when it is not upheld.
The Bubble Beneath the Record – A Financial Crisis in Court Reporting Is Coming
A financial bubble is forming beneath the court reporting industry. Private equity markups have pushed attorneys toward cheaper “alternative” record methods, but those substitutes fail evidentiary standards and are beginning to collapse under legal scrutiny. As reporters reject unsustainable rates and attorneys realize uncertified transcripts don’t hold up in court, the industry is nearing a correction. The record cannot be commodified—and the bubble will burst.
When the Forest Votes for the Axe – A Warning to the Court Reporting Profession
The profession is the forest—and we are the trees. Yet many have been persuaded to welcome the very axe designed to replace us. Digital and AI models present themselves as allies, promising convenience and efficiency, while quietly eroding our roots: accuracy, ethics, and due process. The future of the record depends on whether we recognize the axe for what it is—and defend the forest together.
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.
When Regulation Becomes Endorsement – How the CRB’s Firm Registration List Rewards Non-Reporter-Owned Corporations
California’s Court Reporters Board has turned oversight into inadvertent endorsement. Its public “Registered Firms” list features non-CSR-owned conglomerates like Veritext and Magna—but omits legitimate CSR-owned professional corporations. The result? True shorthand reporting firms are hidden while unlicensed corporations gain state-backed visibility. It’s a structural inequity that undermines professional integrity and consumer trust—and it demands reform.
When Defense Counsel Brought AI to Voir Dire And How One Court Reporter Turned an Ethical Breach Into an Opportunity
When defense counsel was caught red-handed using AI to transcribe voir dire, the courtroom froze. The judge’s question—“Are you giving them realtime?”—made the truth unmistakable. Rather than confront, the reporter stayed calm, answered honestly, and later turned it into an upsell. The same attorney who relied on illegal AI ended up buying realtime from the pro she tried to replace. But AI note-taking tools may be capturing juror identities and responses, permanently exposing private citizens.
The Death of Expertise and the Erosion of the Record & Why Court Reporters Are the Last Line of Truth
In The Death of Expertise, Tom Nichols warns that society is replacing knowledge with convenience. Court reporting stands at that fault line. AI may transcribe words, but it cannot witness truth. Only a certified reporter — physically present, ethically bound — can certify a record. To sign off on machine output isn’t innovation; it’s fraud. And it marks the death of expertise itself.
When a Video Is Played in Court – How to Handle, Certify, and Communicate It Professionally
When an attorney asks you to “take down” a video played in court, your authority comes from Rule 2.1040(d)—not the attorney. Always obtain a court order, mark the playback as a “transcription of an electronic recording,” and certify it separately. This protects your license, the record’s integrity, and your professional credibility while keeping the attorneys—and the judge—happy.
Why the Legal System Doesn’t Understand What’s Happening to Court Reporting
The justice system assumes court reporting is “handled,” but the record itself is collapsing under the rise of uncertified digital labor and AI transcripts. Attorneys, judges, and legislators don’t realize that without certified stenographers, accuracy, ethics, and access to justice all fail. This roadmap shows how to unite the legal community to protect the record—and the rule of law itself.
“They Don’t Know We Need Them” – The Growing Silence Around the Disappearing Court Reporter
As digital recording and AI transcription quietly replace certified court reporters, the justice system risks losing its most vital safeguard — the human record. Attorneys, judges, and legislators don’t realize they’re standing on a collapsing foundation. Without stenographers, there is no certified transcript, no reliable appeal, and no accountability. Saving steno isn’t nostalgia — it’s protecting the rule of law itself.
Court Reporters v. Digital Recording and Voice Recognition – A Comprehensive Breakdown
Digital recording and ASR may promise convenience, but they fail the test of law and logic. Machine transcripts aren’t sworn, certified, or admissible—they’re hearsay without a human declarant. Court reporters remain the only officers of the record who can guarantee accuracy, authenticity, and accountability in real time. Justice still depends on human precision.
Zoom, the Record, and the Reporter – Where Ethics Are Clear and the Law Is Catching Up
As remote depositions become routine, reporters face growing pressure to act as both stenographer and Zoom host. NCRA ethics are clear: reporters cannot record or serve as videographers—but may host solely to prevent unauthorized recording or AI bots. When firms or attorneys refuse to disable ASR, the reporter’s duty is to withdraw, protecting the integrity of the record above all.
Spooky Season or Shady Season?
Magna’s Halloween “Spooky Season” giveaway offers $25 gift cards for every 100-page transcript — a festive twist that may violate California’s court-reporting ethics code. By tying rewards directly to transcript production, the program breaches CCR § 2475(b)(8), which bans gifts or incentives for reporting services. What looks like a treat could become a costly trick for Magna and participating reporters.
StenoImperium Marks 400 Articles – A Chronicle of Truth, Transparency, and Tenacity
StenoImperium celebrates its 400th article — a milestone built on truth, transparency, and independence. While often mistaken for Stenonymous, we are not the same. We’re two separate blogs, on opposite coasts, with distinct voices and philosophies, united only by our shared passion for stenography and protecting the integrity of the record in an era of automation and misinformation.
What Court Reporters Can (and Cannot) Talk About – Ethics, Boundaries, and Public Perception
Court reporters hold the public’s trust—and that includes what we say after we leave the room. Sharing case details, even without names, can still identify participants and damage our impartiality. Confidentiality isn’t just about secrecy; it’s about respect, neutrality, and professionalism. Protecting the record means protecting our reputation—on and offline.
The Ring, the Record, and the Reckoning – What Tolkien Can Teach the Court Reporting Profession About Power and Purpose
Tolkien’s warnings weren’t about magic—they were about human nature. The court reporting profession stands at the same crossroads: mistaking convenience for progress, surrendering truth for efficiency. Like the Ents, we waited for proof. Like Númenor, we believed we’d never drown. But Samwise reminds us—our duty isn’t power. It’s preservation. The record is the ring, and we must never let it fall.
Making a Record – Why Attorneys Keep Losing Their Exhibits on Appeal
Attorneys often assume that showing or publishing an exhibit makes it part of the record—it doesn’t. Only the judge can direct that an exhibit be “marked” or “received.” The clerk keeps the official list; the reporter records what’s said. If you skip the formal steps, your exhibits vanish on appeal. Make your record right, or risk losing it forever.
AI Transcripts Gone Wild – The Day a Transcription Company Asked a Court Reporter to “Certify” Their Robot
A transcription company actually asked a certified court reporter to “sign off” on an AI-generated deposition—no oath, no saved audio, no chain of custody. When the attorney demanded a lawful certification, they tried to hire a reporter to legitimize their robot record. This isn’t innovation; it’s impersonation—and it threatens the integrity of every legal transcript in America.
The Rise of the AI Impostors – How Fake Court Reporters Are Flooding the Legal System
AI notetakers and unlicensed digital “reporters” are quietly infiltrating depositions, recording sensitive testimony without consent or accountability. Videographers are stunned when they see a real stenographer—proof of how rare human guardians of the record have become. Attorneys must learn to spot imposters, protect client confidentiality, and insist on certified court reporters before justice becomes just another algorithmic summary.
The End of the Record?
Verbit’s new mobile app lets anyone “record everything” — but at what cost? Without regulation, uncertified recordings could replace official transcripts, eroding reporter income and the integrity of the record itself. If the profession doesn’t fight back now, “copy sales” may be the least of what’s lost. This isn’t innovation; it’s deregulation disguised as convenience.
The Notary Loophole – Why Digital “Oath-Taking” May Jeopardize the Record
Digital firms are exploiting the “notary loophole” — using notaries instead of licensed court reporters to swear in witnesses and certify transcripts. But notaries aren’t officers of the court. This practice risks inadmissible records, broken chain of custody, and malpractice exposure. Only certified stenographers can lawfully administer oaths and safeguard the integrity of the record.
Free Roughs, Hidden Costs – How AI Transcription Is Quietly Rewriting the Legal Record
Kerala is openly mandating AI transcription in every courtroom. In the U.S., the same shift is happening quietly. Esquire and Veritext now hand out free AI rough drafts, reshaping transcript control through corporate platforms — while some LA Superior Court judges secretly use machine drafts during remote hearings. Policy, business, and judicial habit are converging — outside public view.
Should Court Reporters Redact Social Security Numbers in Transcripts?
Some reporters are quietly redacting Social Security numbers from transcripts—without realizing they may be altering the official record. Privacy concerns are valid, but under most state and federal rules, redaction is the attorney’s responsibility, not the reporter’s. Here’s why automatic redaction could violate ethical duties—and how to protect both accuracy and privacy the right way.
The Real Markup – Why Attorneys Think Reporters Are Overcharging (and Who’s Actually Pocketing the Profit)
Attorneys often assume court reporters are the ones driving up transcript costs. In reality, it’s the agencies in the middle—marking up reporter rates and layering on fees for condensed transcripts, concordances, exhibits, and repositories that reporters don’t see a penny of. As transparency grows, attorneys are discovering the truth: working directly with certified reporters saves money and strengthens the record.
He Who Controls the Record, Controls Reality – Why Court Reporters Are the Last Line of Defense
Whoever controls the record controls reality. Across history, power has always sought to erase, rewrite, or distort inconvenient truths. In today’s courtrooms, the neutral stenographic reporter is the last line of defense against narrative manipulation by judges, agencies, corporations, or algorithms. Undermining their role isn’t modernization — it’s historical amnesia. Guard the record, or lose the truth.
“No Such Thing as a Job Nobody Wants” – Debunking a Convenient Myth in the Court Reporting Industry
Agencies claim they use digital recorders only for the “jobs no one wants.” But reporters know better. Short PI and workers’ comp depos aren’t unwanted—they’re flexible, essential, and often preferred. Labeling them “undesirable” masks profit motives, undercuts opportunities for new talent, and devalues critical legal proceedings. There’s no such thing as a job nobody wants—only work that deserves respect and fair pay.
Fool’s Gold – Why Courts Cannot Turn Depositions Into a “Profit Center”
Courts are not “sitting on a gold mine” — they’re bound by the Constitution. Turning depositions into revenue streams ignores statutes, due process, and the ethical duty to safeguard verbatim accuracy. Sworn reporters are not obstacles but guardians of the record. Replacing them with AI “light edits” risks malpractice, reversals, and erosion of public trust. Fool’s gold is no substitute for justice.
Integrity on the Record – Why Court Reporting Needs Truth, Not Intimidation
Integrity is the backbone of court reporting—yet too often, reporters who speak out are punished instead of praised. Loyalty is demanded, while truth is silenced. We cannot survive as a profession if courage is branded “conflict” and accountability is seen as “disloyalty.” Court reporters must reclaim integrity as our standard, not intimidation.
STENOIMPERIUM 