Câu hỏi thường gặp về tình trạng thiếu hụt phóng viên tòa án

[Updated February 21, 2025]

Read our December 4, 2024 media release

Read our February 21, 2025 media release

Tải xuống bản sao của đơn kiến nghị tại đây.

What is the current status of the case?

On February 19, 2025, the California Supreme Court accepted the case. The Court ordered the Superior Courts of Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Santa Clara, and San Diego Counties to provide more information about “why the relief sought in the petition should not be granted.” The invited the California Legislature to participate in briefing and set a briefing schedule. The Supreme Court only accepts a small percentage of the cases, so its acceptance of this case signals its recognition of the important constitutional issues and the breadth of the impact caused by the shortage.

What is this case about?

This case seeks to protect the constitutional rights of low-income people. Historically, California courts relied on court reporters to create a word-for-word record of what happens in court, known as a “verbatim record.” In recent years, there has been a growing shortage of court reporters, and now courts are regularly unable to provide free court reporters in many cases. People can only get a verbatim record if they hire their own private court reporter. Because low-income people cannot afford this, they are forced to proceed with their cases without any verbatim record. Each day, thousands of hearings happen and there is no verbatim record of what occurred. This violates due process, equal protection, and separation of powers guarantees of the California Constitution.  

Bản ghi chép nguyên văn là gì?

A verbatim record is a word-for-word record of what is said during a hearing, trial, or other court proceeding. This includes the testimony, objections, and arguments made by the parties or their attorneys. It also includes the oral statements made by the judge, such as the ruling and reasoning for it.

Tại sao tôi cần bản ghi chép nguyên văn?

Nếu không có bản ghi chép chính thức, người dân không thể kháng cáo phán quyết không đúng của tòa sơ thẩm. 

Real-life repercussions: Family Violence Appellate Project (FVAP), has been forced to turn away dozens of domestic violence survivors because there was no verbatim record of their hearing. These individuals could have had strong grounds to appeal incorrect trial court rulings, but the lack of a verbatim record made it virtually impossible to win an appeal. In one case, a survivor had been physically abused by her husband – he pulled her out of a car and shoved her into a concrete wall – but the trial court denied her request for a domestic violence restraining order despite photographic evidence of her injuries. Because there was no verbatim record of the hearing, FVAP could not represent the survivor on appeal.

Nếu không có hồ sơ ghi chép đầy đủ về các phiên điều trần trước đó, sẽ có nguy cơ mọi người sẽ bị từ chối cứu trợ quan trọng một cách sai trái. Ví dụ, bản ghi chép nguyên văn rất quan trọng khi một bên yêu cầu tòa án sơ thẩm sửa đổi các lệnh hiện có hoặc ban hành lệnh mới.

Real-life repercussions: FVAP was forced to turn away a domestic violence survivor who wanted to challenge a court order modifying the parties’ child visitation order. The court removed a requirement that her children’s father perform sobriety testing before visiting the children, despite evidence that he had been skipping the sobriety tests rather than passing them. Without a verbatim recording of this hearing, FVAP could not assess the merits of a potential appeal, and therefore could not help the survivor challenge an order she thought was dangerous for their children.

What do you hope will be the outcome of this case?

We are asking the California Supreme Court to require that trial courts electronically record court proceedings for low-income people when the court cannot provide a free court reporter. This will ensure that everyone has equal access to a verbatim record. 

How does this case impact ordinary Californians?

Các Ủy ban Tiếp cận Công lý California recently estimated that over one million hearings and trials in family, probate, and other civil cases had no verbatim record from March 2023 to March 2024. People have deeply important interests at stake in these cases, including child custody and visitation, spousal and child support, divorce, conservatorship, guardianship, debt collection, and civil protections from domestic, workplace, and other forms of harassment and violence. The vast majority of Californians cannot afford to bring a private court reporter to court. The California Hội đồng tư pháp ước tính rằng một phóng viên tòa án tư nhân có chi phí trung bình là $3.300 mỗi ngày.  Chúng tôi muốn đảm bảo rằng mọi người, bất kể giàu nghèo, đều có quyền tiếp cận hồ sơ nguyên văn như nhau, điều này rất quan trọng để bảo vệ những lợi ích này. 

Who are the plaintiff and defendant in this case?

When a case, like this one, is filed directly with the California Supreme Court, the plaintiff is referred to as “Petitioner” and the defendant is referred to as “Respondent.” The Petitioners in this case are Family Violence Appellate Project and Bay Area Legal Aid. The Respondents in this case are the Superior Courts of Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Santa Clara, and San Diego Counties.

Why was this case filed against the Superior Courts of Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Santa Clara, and San Diego Counties?

Tòa án cấp cao của các quận Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Santa Clara và San Diego không tạo được hồ sơ nguyên văn cho những người có thu nhập thấp theo yêu cầu của Hiến pháp California và phán quyết của Tòa án tối cao California Jameson kiện Desta.  One court – San Diego – is regularly failing in this respect; the other three – Los Angeles, Santa Clara, and Contra Costa – have recently issued orders designed to help the problem but do not address it fully.  

Những người thỉnh cầu tìm kiếm sự cứu trợ, nếu được chấp thuận, sẽ cung cấp hướng dẫn phù hợp cho tất cả các tòa án California đang phải đối mặt với cuộc khủng hoảng tiếp cận công lý do thiếu hụt phóng viên tòa án.

Tại sao vụ án này lại được đưa ra xét xử tại Tòa án Tối cao California thay vì tòa án sơ thẩm?

The California Supreme Court is the proper court to hear this case. The court reporter shortage is a statewide emergency that directly harms Californians seeking access to justice. Countless people will suffer irreversible harm if this situation continues, because once a hearing or trial has gone unrecorded there is no way to go back in time and get a verbatim record of what happened. Only the California Supreme Court can resolve the important constitutional issues presented in this case in a way that ensures both certainty and consistent state-wide protection for the rights of all low-income people.

Ghi âm điện tử là gì? Nó hoạt động như thế nào? Có tiểu bang nào khác cho phép điều này không?

Electronic recording captures the audio of what is said during a hearing via microphones installed in a courtroom. Electronic recording is a well-recognized, reliable method for creating a verbatim record and is routinely used in state and federal courtrooms across the country. In 2022, 33 out of 35 states reported that they permitted the use of electronic recording in all or some hearings. (California Access to Justice Commission, Vấn đề Tài liệu về Quyền truy cập vào Hồ sơ tố tụng của Tòa án xét xử California (Nov. 14, 2024), at pg. 16.) Electronic recording is also used routinely in California administrative law proceedings, and in trial courts for unlimited civil cases like eviction and small claims cases.

Tại sao tòa án không sử dụng bản ghi điện tử để tạo ra hồ sơ nguyên văn khi không có phóng viên tòa án? 

California law (Section 69957 of the Government Code) prohibits the use of electronic recording in family law, probate, and other civil cases for the purpose of creating an official verbatim record. The law provides no exception for people who cannot afford to pay for a private court reporter, or when a court-provided court reporter is not available.  As a result, low-income people are frequently denied a verbatim record of their court proceedings. This violates due process, equal protection, and separation of powers guarantees of the California Constitution.

Bạn có yêu cầu Tòa án Tối cao cho phép sử dụng trí tuệ nhân tạo (AI) tại tòa án California không? 

No, this case has nothing to do with artificial intelligence (AI). Electronic recording is not created by artificial intelligence. Electronic recording is simply an audio recording of what is said in the courtroom.

Điều gì sẽ xảy ra nếu tòa án được yêu cầu cung cấp cho tôi một phóng viên tòa án miễn phí nhưng lại không có người nào có mặt tại phiên điều trần của tôi?

Some courts may offer to postpone (“continue”) a hearing in the hopes that a court reporter will be available on the new date. These continuances may span several weeks or months, depending on how busy the court’s calendar is. There is no guarantee that a court reporter will be available on the new date. When there is no court reporter on the new date, people are faced with the same decision between proceeding without a verbatim record and postponing their case yet again, often when they have an urgent need for court orders.

Real-life repercussions: Bay Area Legal Aid (BayLegal) had a client seeking a domestic violence restraining order, but there was no court reporter available on the day of the hearing. The hearing was continued to a future date, in hopes that a court reporter would be available then, and the client had to wait several months for the hearing. During that waiting period, there was a temporary restraining order in place to protect the client from her abuser. However, the abuser violated the restraining order multiple times before the hearing, including stalking the client and assaulting one of their minor children. When the client appeared for the hearing, there again was no court reporter available. The judge did not address the fact that the abuser had violated the temporary restraining order. Because no verbatim record was created, BayLegal could not challenge this order.

Làm sao người khác có thể hỗ trợ nỗ lực của bạn?

We appreciate your support as we urge the California Supreme Court to address this constitutional crisis impacting the rights of low-income people. We suggest following us on social media to receive status updates as the case develops.

If you have been impacted by the court reporter shortage, we want to hear your story. Please take a few minutes to share your story đây.