The interim study revisits last year's failed Senate Bill 1386, introduced by Broken Arrow Republican Sen. Christi Gillespie, which proposed a pilot program to equip 12 courtrooms with cameras and mics, prioritizing those without a designated court reporter.
The bill failed amid privacy concerns in sensitive cases and fears that automated systems could replace Oklahoma's already ailing supply of available court reporters. Gillespie started the study by clarifying her bill's intent.
"It is not live streaming or broadcasting courtroom proceedings, although it does have that capability," Gillespie said. "It does not replace court reporters with AI generated transcripts. And when an official transcript is needed, a certified court reporter would still be responsible for certifying that record."
Legislation would explore using permanently mounted audio and video technology. But lawmakers made it clear they were not interested in making the footage and audio open to the general public.
Instead, she said the legislation is an attempt, she said, to mitigate the court reporter shortage in Oklahoma and assist currently overburdened court reporters in ensuring accurate transcripts, not replace them.
"That shortage can affect our ability to maintain a complete record of every proceeding, and can contribute to delays in moving cases through the judicial system and for defendants, unnecessary delays can also implicate one of our most fundamental constitutional protections: the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial."
Gillespie also ran House Bill 3585 this year alongside Rep. Erick Harris, R-Edmond, which would have increased the annual salary for court reporters from $53,000 to $70, 000 starting Nov. 1. And while the state legislature's bill tracking website says the bill failed in committee, the House and Senate budget portals both include a $2.2 million allocation for the salary increase for FY 2027.
What the day's testimony had to say
Committee members heard testimony supporting Gillespie's legislation from the state supreme court's chief justice, a court reporter, a couple of district attorneys, and a company specialized in court audio/visual infrastructure based in Kentucky.
State Court Chief Justice Dustin Rowe said court reporters in Oklahoma's courtrooms are still important, thanking lawmakers for their recent investments and supporting Gillespie's proposed pilot program - with stipulations.
"I tell you that we've got to keep investing, because today …out of 198 court reporter positions, 75 are vacant," Rowe said. "Of those serving, 25 are eligible for retirement." He said it's the top issue raised by district judges across the state when he visits with them. Support from technology proposed by Gillespie's pilot is one way to ensure the need for court reporters is met, but that access to recordings should be protected, he said.
"So long as that technology is protected and you consider allowing us to draft the rules of the Supreme Court to protect the use of that technology, we are open to a pilot program," Rowe said.
The worry is live broadcasts of active litigation could invite public scrutiny that may impact a court's ability to dish out justice. According to certified court reporter Laura Griffin, the efficacy of her work is compromised when there is loose media of court hearings floating around.
"I can't tell when I see an AI picture on the internet. I can't tell if it's real or not," Griffin said. "I sure don't know how to tell if an audio is real or if it's already been manipulated before it gets to the court reporter before they are to transcribe it."
But District Attorneys Jeremiah Gregory and Matt Ballard, said they support recording court hearings despite the concerns, pointing out they believe the public interest of transparency is paramount.
Gregory compared the transition to when police officers were told to wear body cameras.
"It was the exact same thing," Gregory said. "We were concerned about victims being recorded and not getting distributed out through social media, we were concerned about witnesses and all of that being published to the public."
He said even today, without recording in courtrooms, social media and its possible impacts on litigation are largely inescapable. And while some argue courts are transparent already, Gregory said it's not enough to balance the public trust courts require to operate.
"I've heard this argument multiple times, that transparency already exists in our system because we have an open courtroom," he said. "That is true, but it is not full transparency."
So, he and his counterpart Ballard support the pilot program, but with strict limitations on who can access the footage and tape.
"We have to build in non-negotiable safeguards to protect child witnesses, victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, witnesses facing gang intimidation or violent retribution," Ballard said. "Public access must never become a tool for witness tampering or secondary trauma."
Lawmakers seemed open to revisiting the bill next year.
Gillespie said she already has ideas for how to improve her bill. "I'm constantly tweaking things… part of the bill, it does protect families, but I can see there needs to be some tightening up," she said. "I think the way we're on the same, on the same wavelength of what you're saying."
