Sponsors (4)
The bill directs an evidence-based federal review to make AI speech-to-text in courts more accurate, secure, and accessible, but doing so will add administrative costs, could slow adoption of some tools, and may limit technical input by excluding vendor-affiliated experts.
State and local courts, plus judges and administrators, would receive an evidence-based DOJ/NIJ report to guide oversight, legislation, and policy on using AI transcription in courts.
Courts, litigants, and law-enforcement would get analyses and concrete recommendations to protect the accuracy and integrity of official court records when automated speech recognition (ASR)/AI transcription is used.
People with hearing disabilities would gain clearer guidance and safer options for using AI speech-to-text in court proceedings, improving accessibility.
State and local governments and courts may face short-term increased costs and slower adoption of efficient ASR tools if policymakers adopt restrictive rules based on the report.
Implementing recommended privacy and recordkeeping protections (e.g., watermarking, metadata changes) could impose compliance costs and training burdens on court staff and administrators.
Creating and running the task force will use DOJ/NIJ staff time and administrative resources, producing additional costs for taxpayers.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Creates an NIJ-led 15-member task force to study AI speech-to-text in courts and recommend reforms to protect accuracy, privacy, and constitutional rights.
Creates a 15-member AI Research and Oversight in Courts Task Force, led by the National Institute of Justice, to study the feasibility, accuracy, privacy, and civil liberties implications of using AI speech-to-text and automatic speech recognition in U.S. courts and to deliver an analysis and reform recommendations to Congress, the executive branch, and the judiciary. The task force must be stood up within 60 days of enactment, include a mix of federal and non-federal members with relevant court-record expertise, be co-chaired by designated appointees, and provide a formal report with recommended judicial, legislative, or regulatory changes to protect constitutional rights and the accuracy of official court records.
Introduced March 19, 2026 by Harriet Hageman · Last progress March 19, 2026