The Significance of Stenographers in the Legal Arena
Stenographers have long played a vital role in the United States legal system. The need for such professionals became apparent shortly after the birth of the Republic. In 1844, John R. Gregg invented his ‘shorthand system’. As that decade rolled on, numerous legal and political figures – including John Tyler, Daniel Webster, and Daniel O’Connell – used this shorthand on their road to the House of Representatives. Over a century later, the National Court Reporters Association (NCRA) was founded to further the stenographer profession. The organization also serves as an educational resource for both courts and lawyers, thus ensuring proper legal proceedings on every level.
Legal practitioners today still rely on stenographers to provide an accurate record of all courtroom proceedings. In civil cases, a stenographer is responsible for typing out all relevant dialogue and procedures, providing detailed information on everything from witness testimony to jury instructions. Should a civil case proceed to an appellate hearing, the stenographer transcript serves as both the backbone of the plaintiff’s correspondence and as invaluable documentation for the court itself.
As with civil proceedings, the role of a stenographer in criminal cases is vital. All related dialogue and procedures are again typed out in full, ensuring that a clear, readily available record is kept at the state level. When structural issues arise – as they did in the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling on Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado – all evidence must be presented to the Court. Stenographers help ensure that such evidence is reliably transcribed. This is particularly important when jurors present new evidence , or express concerns regarding the integrity of their deliberative process. In disallowing "the kind of racism when it becomes conscious and overt, rather than merely subconsciously biased," SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) ruled that the jury foreman’s ‘post-verdict’ testimony could not be ignored. The evidence presented by the juror led to the reversal of a Colorado conviction for Javier Peña-Rodriguez, who had been found guilty of sexually assaulting two girls.
Stenographers are also responsible for maintaining the court calendar, exhibiting all scheduled proceedings in an accessible manner. Without proper scheduling, judges may engage with disputing parties at inappropriate times. Stenographers also play a crucial role in resolving scheduling conflicts, proving capable of communicating across departments and state lines. Like all court personnel, they operate under the jurisdiction of the Chief Judge, who determines which procedures may be delegated. Those who work in the civil, criminal, juvenile, and family law branches must exhibit knowledge of their field’s ins and outs. As 25 states, including Florida, offer "official" court reporter positions, such practitioners are expected to fulfill a wide range of legal duties.
As the value of accurate records continues to dawn on legislators, courts are validating this perspective with state law. While judges have long recognized the importance of proper records, lawmakers at the state level now agree – and some are taking action to ensure that stenographers can continue to provide courtroom coverage in the coming decades.
Technological Innovations in Court Reporting
The impact of technology on stenography and court reporting is evident in how the methods of recording court proceedings have evolved to include digital recording and even voice recognition software. These innovations have introduced various options for capturing testimony that have both added new responsibilities for stenographers and sometimes reduced their roles.
For instance, some courts have opted for the convenience of lawyers using smartphones and tablets to record witness testimony, foregoing the services of a stenographer. While the reporter’s job has not gone away completely, these technological tools do result in fewer minitrials, hearings and depositions requiring a stenographer’s precise recordkeeping.
This has also been seen in mass tort proceedings, such as litigation on behalf of plaintiffs seeking compensation for injuries sustained in medical device and pharmaceutical disputes. In these cases, courts overseeing hundreds or thousands of similar lawsuits have looked to technological solutions, adopting electronic recording systems to obtain testimony rather than hiring multiple stenographers in each jurisdiction. Still, while many cases are now overseen with digital technology, the role of the stenographers remains important to the legal process, and the court reporting profession is now evolving along with the profession.
While these innovative methods of recording can be embraced when applicable, they shouldn’t be viewed as threats to stenography, which remains the gold standard of recording court proceedings.
The Present Use of Stenographers in Courtrooms
While the majority of disputes are resolved out of court, court reporters remain essential to many aspects of the legal process. Most often thought of as transcriptionists, courts and administrative agencies still employ stenographers to transcribe legal proceedings. In contrast to other transcription that may be done on non-legal matters like dictation schedules and book transcription, stenographers specifically refer to transcription performed in connection to legal proceedings, whether civil or criminal, or any other transcript-type services performed by a stenographer. According to a report by the National Center for State Courts, over 90 percent of courts in the United States and its territories hire court reporters directly, in contrast to free-lance transcriptionists, to document court proceedings. And, it is estimated that 35 percent report to judges directly. Perhaps even more surprising is that most jurisdictions requiring transcription services still prefer the traditional stenographic method over other means of typing transcripts; the exceptions are South Dakota, Wisconsin and the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, which is largely due to the fact that the latter two require transcripts for civil but do not for criminal proceedings. As for courts using stenographers directly, it is still more common to find them in state and local courts than their federal counterpart. But all courts seem to be eschewing closed-captioning technology. Of the 27 state courts with mandatory jurisdiction, 67 percent use stenographic court reporters while 30 percent use digital or broadcast captioning. Though, it is important to note that neither digital court reporting nor broadcast captioning are capable of providing the verbatim records that currently define the job description of stenographic court reporters. Furthermore, digital reporters typically use digital tapes, digital memory cards or integrated digital devices, which can also be classified as stenographic equipment. Although the federal courts are also dominated by the stenographic method, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) decided that courts should consider more cost-effective alternatives to stenography, as well as the impact of electronic filing on the demand for court reporters. Therefore, the Judicial Conference of the United States adopted the use of district court automation systems in March of 2012, but left those who wish to hire contractors for these services to their discretion. Though, when it comes to courts using stenographers, Pennsylvania seems to have the highest percentage (99.6%) of courts that still employ stenographers directly with some jurisdictions opting to digitize them with corresponding audio recordings. To date, in addition to Pennsylvania, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, Missouri, Washington and the Ninth Circuit of the District Court also still employ stenographers as part of their transcription teams. Of course, it is significant to note that the demand over the past few years for stenographers at both state and federal levels has been affected by the recent economic recession; however, this does not mean that stenographers will no longer be used in court. Stenographers continue to play an important role in the progression of court reporters across the country, providing a needed service, though they are no longer the sole option for those who need professional transcription. Nonetheless, as evidenced by the continued use of stenographers in state and federal courts, many consider this method more desirable than more modern alternatives.
Pros and Drawbacks of Traditional Stenography
Continuing with the trend of near-instant transcripts and the trend of real-time transcription, much of the past decades’ innovation in court reporting has focused on digital methods for capturing testimony. While digital reporting comes with its own unique set of advantages and limitations, they cannot be overlooked that there were also some serious benefits to keeping with a traditional stenographer.
Stenographers are reliable
A stenographer could be relied upon to provide the court with an accurate and reproducible transcript. That reliability was rooted in the fact that the court had a stenographer on every case, even if the parties opted to use a digital reporter. Throughout the trial or deposition, the stenographer would compile a complete record of the case. Stenographers’ volume of transcripts far exceeded their colleagues who have converted to digital reporting.
Stenographers were the repository for all exhibits
In the pre-digital world, paperwork was prevalent, and the stenographer remained the "banker" of the case, preserving every deposition exhibit, every piece of paper, and in some instances , every tape and disk from the trial. This practice protected the parties while also keeping all material in one spot for the stenographer to work from while writing the transcript. Note also that the electronic world "forced" all the parties into the same space to preserve the record.
Stenographers practiced thoroughness and uniformity
To be a stenographer, you were trained on equipment and practices that would ensure your work was uniform with every other stenographer, and confidentiality was paramount. No one doubted a stenographer’s ability to have every exhibit at their fingertips. Stenographers arrived a few minutes early to set up their equipment, and they broke when everyone else broke. When everybody cleared the courtroom, stenographers tidied their desk and took the time to prepare for their next day’s proceedings. Stenographers were diligent in their work and storage of everything they were responsible for.
Today’s reporters using a laptop computer can suffer from lack of preparation, late starts, and lack of consistent typing positions; sometimes (depending on the comfort of counsel) they can work from the conference room as opposed to the witness room, which we will address in the next section.
The Future of Reporting in the Court
Nevertheless, the legal field is always searching for ways to innovate, so a natural question to ask ourselves is: do courts still use stenographers? The future of court reporting will be led by the creation of live captions and voice recognition technology. The rise of court reporting services and companies that offer live captions and voice recognition capabilities showcase the movement toward technology in the legal field. These modern-day captioning and reporting companies are swift and are designed to be used easily . This technology allows reporters to hear and transcribe in real time, which is extremely beneficial for judges and courts because they are able to follow along with trial presentations or live caption for those who are hearing impaired. As the technology shifts and grows to be faster, the modern court reporter will need to be equipped to use new methods of recording information. For example, with the push towards hearing from clients remotely via video depositions or at trial, the ability to pull up testimony and have that testimony work seamlessly with the presentation system is advantageous for the trial team. As long as there is practice and effort in understanding the use of these technologies, the future of the modern court reporter seems bright.