This week, the California Supreme Court ruled that courts must allow electronic records of hearings when certified court reporters are not available.
Court reporters are responsible for creating an accurate verbatim transcript of hearings, making transcripts particularly important in cases where someone is trying to appeal a ruling. However, a severe shortage of court reporters has resulted in over three million cases proceeding without an official record since 2023.
Reporters are trained to actively interrupt courtroom proceedings to clarify the record if a voice is hard to hear, ensure the physical transcript ends up in the correct hands and can legally be held accountable if there is any problem with a transcript.
“ I think there's a general misunderstanding in the public about what a transcript is for and how it's used,” said Todd Combs, a second-generation court reporter and the owner of Combs Reporting, Inc. “ Simply recording something doesn't create a proper transcript [...] that's why the human reporter has always been the gold standard.”
While there is no official hiring freeze of court reporters, San Francisco-based Attorney Scott Kronland noted during the Supreme Court hearing that the court system’s budgetary restrictions function as a de facto freeze, and that this ruling should mitigate some of the factors causing the ongoing court reporting shortage. The shortage has had multiple contributing factors, including the profession’s lack of visibility, a primarily aging workforce, rigorous state licensing exams and massive layoffs.
Measures have been put into place to combat the reporter shortage. Governor Newsom signed AB 156 in 2022, authorizing the use of voice writers in courts, resulting in more certified reporters joining the field. Additionally, remote class offerings at programs like Saratoga’s West Valley College allow for a wider range of students to enroll.
“[The California Supreme Court’s decision] just motivates me to finish school quicker so that I can be one of court reporters, because I've always wanted to be an official,” said West Valley College student Tara Ocaña.
While these changes are promising for the profession’s future, cases are still proceeding without certified reporters in attendance right now. Courts often prioritize sending court reporters to cases like felony criminal proceedings. Meanwhile, more than two-thirds of all family law and probate cases from 2023 to 2026 were held without a reporter.
In civil cases where courts can’t provide reporters, the onus is on the parties to hire their own, which can cost thousands of dollars. In cases heard without a court reporter, there’s no official record, without which a verdict is very difficult to appeal.
Electronic recordings, which were banned before Monday’s ruling, are supposed to remedy access issues. Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero wrote that in the opinion of the Court, “a verbatim record created by electronic recording is better than no record at all.”
Unions representing court reporters expressed concerns about the difference in quality between human-made transcripts and electronically recorded verbatim records. High stakes cases, like custody decisions or issuing restraining orders, are of particular concern.
“One wrong word or one missing word could make the difference between somebody winning an appeal or losing an appeal,” said Combs. “ It's important that all members of the public have equal access to a good record.”
