.jpg)
The court reporter has been one of the most quietly essential figures in the courtroom. Seated between the judge's bench and the witness stand, they capture every spoken word in real time, producing what becomes the official legal record of the proceeding.
That seat is becoming increasingly empty.
The Numbers Behind the Shortage
The court reporter shortage is not a staffing blip. It is a structural dilemma built from an aging workforce and a shrinking pipeline.
According to the National Court Reporters Association (NCRA), the average court reporter is 56 years old across 7,630 active members, and there simply are not enough newly trained reporters to fill the seats being vacated. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects employment of court reporters to show little or no change from 2024 to 2034, yet approximately 1,700 openings are expected each year over the decade.
Becoming a certified court reporter is no small undertaking. Candidates must master stenotype, a specialized keyboard that uses simultaneous key combinations, or "chords," to capture speech at speeds of 180 to 225 words per minute with high accuracy. They must pass written exams covering legal terminology, ethics, and procedure and, in most states, obtain a state license in addition to national certification. It takes most candidates two to four years just to reach the exam stage. NCRA data shows that newly certified members across all credential types totaled 243 in 2023, dropped to 211 in 2024, and fell again to 205 in 2025. The number of new certified court reporters is decreasing and can’t keep up with demand.
The consequences of not adapting to this gap are already showing up. In California alone, out of 2,831,721 family law, probate, and unlimited civil hearings held between April 2023 and June 2025, approximately 2,037,562 (72%) had no verbatim record. Those missing transcripts represent litigants who cannot appeal decisions because no official record exists.
So What Are Courts Doing?
Faced with a shrinking pool of court reporters, many jurisdictions have turned to electronic court recording as a stopgap and, in some cases, a permanent solution. Courts today generally operate under one of three models:
Traditional Model - a certified stenographer is physically present in the courtroom, transcribing in real time using a stenotype machine.
Digital Court Reporting (Hybrid) Model - a certified digital court reporter is present in the courtroom or monitoring remotely, managing professional audio recording equipment that captures each voice on separate tracks. The audio file is then sent to a transcriptionist who produces the written record, a process some courts are beginning to accelerate using speech-to-text software to generate a rough draft for human review and certification. A person is still actively involved, but the equipment and workflow are different.
Electronic Model - no certified professional is present during the proceeding. The recording runs unmonitored, and quality control occurs after the fact, with a transcriptionist reviewing the audio file.
Some courts have already made the switch to fully electronic, with Kentucky serving as a notable example. In 1999, all references to printed transcripts were removed from the state's court rules, making the recorded audio and video the sole official court record. Parties may still hire private court reporters to produce written transcripts from the video for their own use, but the video record is what the court recognizes as official.
Weighing the Methods
The shift toward electronic recording is not without debate. Each method carries real advantages and real limitations.
Accuracy
The traditional model with a licensed sternographer is still the gold standard. Candidates must pass a licensing exam, each varying state to state, but typically requiring speeds around 200 words per minute with accuracy thresholds at or above 95 percent. They can stop proceedings to protect the record, ask for clarification, and capture incidentals that audio alone misses such as a witness pointing, a moment of silence, an emotional reaction. These details can matter in an appeal.
Digital court reporting by a certified professional using quality equipment can have similar accuracy in favorable conditions. Where accuracy concerns arise is with fully automated speech to text software used without adequate human oversight. In real-world courthouse environments, generic automated speech recognition models struggle with dense legal jargon and proper noun tracking. Crosstalk between attorneys, judges, and witnesses significantly spikes errors. Word error rates increase for heavily accented or vernacular-heavy speech. And background noise can push error rates well beyond what vendors advertise in controlled benchmark conditions. This becomes a major issue in the electronic model where there is no professional present.
Cost
Digital court reporting generally runs cheaper. Digital court reporters often cost 20 to 30 percent less than traditional stenographic services. Lower overhead and technology reduce operational expenses that pass savings to clients. Faster turnaround times also decrease overall litigation costs through improved case progression.
That said, the upfront cost of switching is real. Electronic recording systems require multi-channel microphones, recording hardware, software licensing, secure audio storage, and ongoing IT maintenance.
What This Means for Courthouse Planning
Whether a court is fully transitioning to electronic recording, operating in an electronic court reporter model, or simply planning for future flexibility, the physical courthouse needs to be part of the conversation. These decisions have real implications for how spaces are designed, wired, and equipped.
The Courtroom Station
The court reporter's station requires approximately 25 to 30 square feet including circulation, with electrical outlets, audio recording equipment space, and positioning within easy sight and hearing of the witness and the judge. That footprint does not change significantly with electronic recording, but its function does. In a digital court reporting model, the same station accommodates a monitor and recording equipment rather than a stenotype machine. In a fully electronic model, the station may house only unattended recording equipment.
While the overall courtroom size is unlikely to shrink meaningfully, there is an opportunity to design the station with flexibility in mind. A modular or movable station can accommodate a traditional stenographer when needed and transition to a monitoring setup when not, without requiring reconfiguration of the room. This flexibility becomes particularly valuable in courthouses with large numbers of courtrooms, where recording methods may vary by courtroom type or proceeding.
The Court Reporter Office
Traditional court reporters have required dedicated offices adjacent to their assigned courtroom, typically around 150 square feet per reporter. As courts shift toward digital court reporting, that individual office model gives way to something different. Rather than an isolated private office reserved for one reporter, a centralized monitoring room can serve the entire courthouse. A digital reporter can oversee multiple courtrooms simultaneously from a single location. So the number of offices can be fewer, instead of having a court reporter's office for every courtroom. This shift has four distinct planning implications:
Control room space - rather than budgeting individual offices per courtroom, the program now needs additional monitoring room space sized appropriately for the number of courtrooms being served and the equipment required to support them.
Workstation counts - rather than dedicating a private office to each courtroom, a potential solution is having dedicated workstations where the number is scaled to the needs of the courthouse. This reduces the overall space commitment while still providing dedicated, properly equipped workspaces for reporters and transcribers.
Adjacency - the monitoring room's location within the courthouse matters. Proximity to the courtrooms being monitored reduces response time if a technical issue arises mid-proceeding, and proximity to IT support ensures problems can be addressed quickly without disrupting the official record.
IT Support Space - audio files, server infrastructure, and data storage all require dedicated space with the capacity to support the entire courthouse's recording operations.
Looking Ahead
The court reporter shortage is not going away, but the path forward does not have to rely solely on filling seats that are increasingly difficult to fill. Digital court reporting requires significantly less training than traditional stenography, opening the profession to a broader pool of candidates without sacrificing the certified human oversight that courts require. An electronic court reporter model addresses the shortage more immediately and more practically than waiting for stenography pipelines to recover.
The shift toward electronic court reporting also presents a practical opportunity for courthouse planning. Court reporter office space that was once a fixed program requirement can be reconsidered, reduced, or repurposed as transcription moves off-site and digital methods reduce the need for dedicated on-site workspace.
Perhaps most importantly, flexibility may matter more than any single recording method. A courthouse built today will likely experience several generations of court reporting technology over its useful life. Programming spaces that can accommodate a traditional stenographer today, a digital reporter tomorrow, and future technologies over the next 30 to 50 years allows courts to adapt as staffing, technology, and judicial policies continue to evolve without requiring major renovations each time they do.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
