2026 Court-Reporting Laws Legislative Developments to Watch

New laws in Georgia and Louisiana are changing court-reporting requirements, while California has two major court-reporting-related bills awaiting the Governor.

The legal-record landscape is changing across several states in 2026.

New legislation addresses who may create a deposition record, how court-reporter notes and recordings must be retained, how court-reporter pools are structured, and how former government-employed reporters may return to contractual work.

California has also passed two significant bills through the Legislature that, as of September 11, 2026, remain with the Governor. One addresses court-reporter licensing and remote court-reporting pilot programs. The other addresses attorneys', arbitrators' and judicial officers' use of generative artificial intelligence.

For JusVox, the important distinction is between enacted laws, legislation awaiting executive action, and separate court decisions. The following is a fact-based summary of the major developments.

GEORGIA

HB 1208, Depositions Must Be Taken Before Certified Court Reporters

Status: ENACTED LAW

Effective: July 1, 2026

Georgia HB 1208, enacted as Act 387, changes Georgia's statutory requirements governing depositions.

The legislation requires depositions in Georgia to be taken and recorded before certified court reporters and removes the previous statutory requirement that depositions be recorded specifically by stenographic means. Georgia's official legislative summary states that the law allows the deposition to be recorded by a certified court reporter or by means permitted by the Board of Court Reporting.

What the law says

• Depositions must be taken and recorded before certified court reporters.
• The statute removes the requirement that depositions be recorded by stenographic means.
• The law became effective July 1, 2026.
• The legislation amends Georgia Code Sections 9-11-28 and 9-11-30.

What this means for attorneys

Georgia attorneys taking depositions are subject to the amended deposition requirements, including the requirement that the deposition be taken before a certified court reporter.

What this means for court reporters

The statute focuses on the certified court reporter and removes stenographic means as the statutory recording requirement.

What this means for students

The statute itself does not establish a new educational or licensing pathway for students.

What this means for the workflow

The statutory framework is now:

Deposition certified court reporter recording method permitted under the applicable rules

rather than a statutory requirement that the deposition be recorded specifically by stenographic means.

LOUISIANA

HB 179 / Act 60 , Court-Reporter Notes and Recordings

Status: ENACTED LAW

Effective: August 1, 2026

Louisiana HB 179 became Act 60 and changes Louisiana law concerning the retention, ownership, custody and control of court-reporter notes and recordings in criminal and civil cases.

Criminal cases

Under the enacted law:

• Court reporters generally must retain notes and tape audio recordings of criminal cases indefinitely.
• If the proceeding is fully transcribed, notes and recordings that have been fully transcribed must be retained for at least two years after transcription is completed.
• In criminal cases in which all defendants are acquitted, the court reporter does not have to retain the notes and tape audio recordings.
• A court may order destruction of notes and recordings.

Civil cases

The law provides that:

• Court reporters must retain notes and tape audio recordings for at least five years after the end of the trial.
• If the trial record is fully transcribed, the notes and recordings that have been fully transcribed must be retained for at least two years after transcription is completed.
• A court may order destruction.

Ownership and custody

The law provides that the notes and recordings are property of the court.

If a court reporter retires or leaves court employment, the notes, audio recordings and other records of court proceedings remain in the custody and control of the court.

What this means for the workflow

The law expressly addresses both the transcript and the underlying notes and recordings.

The statutory framework therefore includes:

Proceeding notes/recordings retention transcript continued court custody

where applicable.

LOUISIANA

HB 177 / Act 532 , Former Official Court Reporters May Contract With Their Former Public Employer

Status: ENACTED LAW

Effective: August 1, 2026

Louisiana HB 177 became Act 532.

The law creates an exception to the state's restrictions concerning assistance after termination of public service.

Specifically, the enacted statute states that the restriction does not prohibit a former official court reporter from rendering services on a contractual basis to or for the former public employer.

What the law says

The statute specifically provides:

Nothing in this Section shall prohibit a former official court reporter from rendering services on a contractual basis to or for his former public employer.

What this means for court reporters

A former official court reporter may provide contractual services to or for the former public employer under the statutory exception.

What this means for firms

The statute specifically concerns contractual services involving former official court reporters and their former public employers.

What this means for attorneys and courts

The statute changes the restriction applicable to former official court reporters providing contractual services to or for their former public employer.

LOUISIANA

HB 187 / Act 291 , Court-Reporter Pool and Related Provisions

Status: ENACTED LAW

Effective: May 22, 2026

Louisiana HB 187 became Act 291 and revises provisions concerning court reporters and the court reporter pool employed or approved by the Louisiana Supreme Court.

Important correction

Earlier reporting about this measure incorrectly characterized it as eliminating or repealing the Louisiana Supreme Court's reporter pool.

That is not what the enacted legislation says.

The enacted law expressly establishes a court reporter pool of 30 emergency court reporters employed or approved by the Louisiana Supreme Court. Those reporters may be assigned to district courts throughout the state as the need arises.

What the law says

The legislation:

• Establishes a pool of 30 emergency court reporters.
• Allows those reporters to be assigned to various district courts as needed.
• Provides for transcripts for criminal appeals and other necessary purposes.
• Provides for compensation, travel expenses and related costs for pool reporters.
• Provides that emergency court reporters have the authority of an official reporter for a district court when appointed under the statute.
• Addresses stenographer-reporters of the Louisiana Board of Tax Appeals.
• Provides that a stenographer-reporter of the Board of Tax Appeals is considered a certified digital reporter during continued employment in that capacity.

What this means for the workflow

The law expressly provides a mechanism for emergency court reporters to be assigned to district courts when needed.

The statutory structure is:

Court-reporting need emergency reporter pool assignment to district court transcript preparation/certification

where applicable.

CALIFORNIA

AB 2783 , Court Reporting

PASSED THE LEGISLATURE, AWAITING GOVERNOR

As of September 11, 2026, AB 2783 is NOT YET LAW.

California AB 2783 passed the Senate and Assembly on August 26, was enrolled August 30, and was presented to the Governor on September 3, 2026. The California Legislature currently lists its location as Governor.

The bill concerns California court-reporter licensing and remote court-reporting pilot projects.

RPR Certification and California Licensing

AB 2783 would amend California's licensing examination requirements to allow successful completion of the National Court Reporters Association's Registered Professional Reporter (RPR) certification to satisfy the Dictation/Transcription portion of the California licensing examination.

The bill does not eliminate California's other examination requirements.

Applicants using the RPR pathway would still be required to satisfy the requirements for the English and Professional Practice portions of the California examination.

What the bill would do

If enacted:

• RPR certification satisfies California Dictation/Transcription examination requirement

The applicant would still need to pass the remaining required portions of California's licensing examination.

Important clarification

AB 2783 does not state that an out-of-state RPR can automatically practice court reporting in California.

That was an inference in the earlier version of this article and has been removed.

California Remote Court-Reporting Pilot

AB 2783 would also extend California's existing remote court-reporting pilot program.

The bill defines remote court reporting as:

the use of a stenographic reporter who is not present in the courtroom to produce a verbatim record of court proceedings that are transmitted by audiovisual means to the reporter.

The bill would extend the pilot projects so that they must terminate no later than July 1, 2028, and the statutory provisions governing the program would remain in effect until January 1, 2029.

The participating courts include superior courts in:

• Alameda
• Contra Costa
• Los Angeles
• Mendocino
• Monterey
• Orange
• San Bernardino
• San Diego
• San Joaquin
• San Mateo
• Santa Clara
• Tulare
• Ventura

Reporter requirements under the pilot

The bill specifies that remote reporting would be performed by:

• Full-time official reporters
• Licensed under California law
• Employed by the participating superior court
• With at least two years of courtroom experience in a California superior court.

The bill also states that participating reporters are to be treated in the same manner as other official reporters concerning compensation, benefits, classification, seniority, job description and bargaining units.

Proceedings covered

The bill allows participating courts to use remote court reporting in specified proceedings, including certain:

• Limited civil matters
• Law-and-motion proceedings
• Unlimited civil matters
• Family-law matters
• Child-support matters
• Probate
• Juvenile dependency
• Juvenile delinquency
• Felony proceedings
• Misdemeanor proceedings

The bill excludes preliminary hearings, trials and death-penalty cases from the pilot.

Technology requirements

The bill specifies equipment requirements for participating courtrooms, including:

• Individual microphones
• Cameras
• Speakers
• A microphone and speaker for the court reporter
• A camera for the court reporter
• Two-way communication between the reporter and judicial officer.

The bill also provides that if technology or audibility problems prevent the reporter from accurately capturing and certifying the record, the proceeding must be temporarily suspended until the problem can be resolved.

CALIFORNIA

SB 574 , Attorneys, Arbitrators, Judicial Officers and Generative AI

PASSED THE LEGISLATURE, AWAITING GOVERNOR

As of September 11, 2026, SB 574 is NOT YET LAW.

The bill passed both houses on August 31, was enrolled September 4 and was presented to the Governor on September 9, 2026. The California Legislature currently lists its location as Governor.

SB 574 concerns the use of generative artificial intelligence by attorneys and other legal professionals.

If enacted, the bill would require attorneys using generative AI to:

• Take specified measures to protect confidential, personal-identifying and other nonpublic information.
• Take reasonable steps to verify generative-AI output.
• Take reasonable steps to correct erroneous or hallucinated output.
• Disclose the use of generative AI to the court for documents submitted to the court.
• Personally verify citations included in court filings.

The bill also addresses the use of generative AI by arbitrators and judicial officers.

Why this appears in a court-reporting update

• SB 574 is not a court-reporter licensing bill.
• It is included because it concerns the use of AI within the legal workflow and therefore is relevant to legal professionals working with legal records, including transcripts.
• However, it would be inaccurate to say the bill specifically regulates court reporters.
• It does not.

WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE COURT-REPORTING INDUSTRY

These measures address different parts of the profession, but they all involve the creation, preservation, certification or use of the legal record.

The 2026 legislation includes provisions concerning:

• Certified court reporters
• Stenographic reporting
• Digital reporting
• Remote court reporting
• Court-reporter pools
• Reporter notes
• Audio recordings
• Transcript retention
• Professional certification
• Generative artificial intelligence

For reporters, firms, attorneys, schools and legal-technology companies, these are areas worth watching as states continue to establish their own rules.

• California Legislature AB 2783 official bill status
• California Legislature AB 2783 enrolled text
• California Legislature SB 574 official bill status
• California Legislature SB 574 text
• Georgia General Assembly 2026 legislation summary
• Louisiana Legislature HB 179 / Act 60
• Louisiana Legislature HB 177 / Act 532
• Louisiana Legislature HB 187 / Act 291