The number of U.S. court reporters has fallen 21% to fewer than 23,000 over the past decade, according to a 2025 report from the Council for the Advancement of Professionals, Technology and Unbiased Reporting, creating a shortage that is driving courts to adopt AI transcription tools despite industry warnings about their limitations.
The profession has become an example of AI’s limits in replacing human skill in the real world, legal professionals say. In a courtroom, court reporters record nonverbal cues like gestures and work through distracting noises. The verbatim transcripts they certify become part of the official legal record and play a critical role in appeals.
“Everyone needs their day in court,” said Jayne Williams, a 33-year-old trainee in Pella, Iowa. “We’re a big part of that.”
Williams, who is about three years into training, said she is not worried about warnings that AI will take over her budding career. She hopes to work in Iowa courts, where she said the base salary is $63,000 with state benefits. Court reporters across the country can make upward of $100,000 through per-page fees they collect for transcript copies and depositions.
The threat, according to legal professionals, is not that AI can do the job better but that too few humans are entering the field. A long-brewing shortage has worsened as more stenographers retire and few newcomers complete the rigorous training. In California, nearly half of active court reporter licenses were issued at least 30 years ago, according to the state’s judicial branch.
Because of the shortage, about 72% of civil cases in California between April 2023 and June 2025 had no verbatim record, the Judicial Branch of California said. This month, California’s Supreme Court heard arguments on whether to allow electronic recording in civil cases, where it is currently prohibited in many.
North Dakota phased out stenographers this year and switched to recording all proceedings. Sally A. Holewa, the state court administrator, said the lack of court reporters and the high cost of transcripts — people would pay hundreds of dollars for a stenographer’s transcript versus $10 for an electronic recording — drove the decision.
The National Court Reporters Association said AI-assisted transcription remains prone to errors.
“Nobody can take over the integrity that we bring,” said Cindy Isaacsen, the association’s president.
Isaacsen cited the 2023 double-murder trial of Alex Murdaugh as an example: a digital recording system used as a backup to the official court reporter produced a transcript the defense said was too flawed to be useful.
Others argue the technology is improving. Digital court reporters must obtain certifications showing they can operate equipment and capture a legal proceeding, a process that can take weeks compared to the sometimes yearslong process for traditional reporters.
“The future isn’t stenographers versus AI, it’s legal professionals using AI to meet industry demand,” said James Holmes, chief revenue officer for Verbit.AI, a company that provides courtroom transcription services.
Court reporters describe learning the craft as simultaneously learning to play an instrument and speak a foreign language. Williams has taken classes in medical and legal terminology and said she spends at least 18 hours a week practicing on her stenography machine.
Texas requires reporters to achieve 95% accuracy while typing 225 words a minute for five minutes straight. Allie Hall, a certified court reporter who runs a training program with about 800 enrollees, said she thinks the industry should consider testing entry-level reporters at a speed fluctuating between 180 and 225 words a minute.
Some court reporters now work as voice writers, a process that requires shorter training. Emma Guillot, 24, spent 10 months in such a program before becoming certified in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. She speaks into a sound-dampening “stenomask,” using vocal shorthand to transcribe every word, captured by speech-to-text software she can refine afterward.
Guillot, who holds a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice, said that while some people think of court reporters as older women in courtrooms, the role is a perfect fit for her. AI can help, she said, but cannot replace trained professionals.
“Attorneys and judges want a record they can trust,” she said.