Response to the CA Attorney General’s Amicus Brief in the Court Reporter Case

The AG’s brief, filed on June 27th, is a welcome, thoughtful and detailed analysis of the impact of section 69957 (the law that currently bars use of electronic recordings in most civil cases in California). The AG’s brief confirms that “the combination of the court reporter shortage and section 69957 means that many low-income litigants in California are unable to obtain a verbatim record of their superior court proceedings, including proceedings that affect some of the most significant aspects of their lives;” that the resulting impact on those litigants’ constitutional rights is “untenable;” that “this case satisfies the demanding criteria for original mandate relief from this Court;” and that the relief sought in the petition “should be granted.”

There are a few areas of respectful disagreement with the Attorney General’s brief. For example, the AG’s brief suggests the Court issue interim relief, while we are urging the Court to issue full and final relief to the millions of Californians being denied a record. While these disagreements are important enough to note in our reply brief, none of them should stand in the way of the Court granting the relief sought in our petition. And the Attorney General agrees that relief should be granted swiftly to prevent further harms to low-income litigants. We applaud the AG’s strong support of our petition, which centers the low-income litigants whose constitutional rights are being violated daily.