News

The administration of justice relies fundamentally on accurate, timely court records. As state legislatures consider updates to rules of civil procedure, it’s crucial to recognize that multiple professional methodologies – stenographic, voice, and digital reporting – now serve this essential function with equal precision and accountability.

Court reporters using voice and digital technologies are certified officers of the court who, like their stenographic colleagues, bear full responsibility for the official record. These professionals hold the same sacred duty: to capture, certify, and preserve legal proceedings with unwavering accuracy. Each is trained extensively in legal terminology, deposition and courtroom protocol, and the exacting standards of record preservation.

The critical functions these professionals perform extend far beyond their respective technologies:

As officers of the court, they administer oaths and maintain the solemnity of proceedings. They actively manage complex exhibits and when attorneys require immediate playback of testimony, they provide real-time access to the record. Most importantly, they exercise their authority to halt proceedings when clarity is compromised, whether by overlapping voices, unclear speech, or nonverbal responses.

Our justice system faces an unprecedented challenge. The diminishing availability of stenographers – driven by retirement rates outpacing new graduates – has created substantial backlogs in courts nationwide. This shortage directly impacts constituents’ constitutional right to timely justice. When depositions and hearings are delayed by months due to reporter unavailability, the fundamental promise of our legal system is compromised.

Updating civil procedure rules to explicitly recognize all professional capture methodologies serves two crucial purposes: it preserves the high standards of court reporting while ensuring courts can fulfill their constitutional obligations to provide timely access to justice. This approach acknowledges that the integrity of the record depends not on the method of capture, but on the professional standards, training, and accountability of the certified officers who create it.

The diversification of court reporting approaches mirrors the improvements we’ve embraced in other aspects of our justice system. Just as electronic filing has enhanced court efficiency without compromising standards, professional voice and digital reporting methodologies have proven their ability to maintain the exacting requirements of legal record-keeping.

By updating civil procedure rules to recognize all certified capture methodologies, legislators can ensure their constituents maintain access to timely justice while preserving the high standards our legal system demands. This measured approach protects both the integrity of the record and the fundamental right to prompt resolution of legal matters.

The imperative is clear: we must adapt our procedural framework to embrace all professional court reporting methodologies, ensuring that justice remains accessible, efficient, and uncompromised in its standards.