Oklahoma Pilot Speech-to-Text Recording and Cloud Storage Program

The Supreme Court of Oklahoma has created a pilot speech-to-text program.  In re: District Court Pilot Program for Speech to Text Recording and Cloud Storage, __ P. 2d __, 2026 OK 73, 2026 WL 3046928 (Okla. Oct. 12, 2026).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) A three-year Speech to Text Recording and Cloud Storage Pilot Program is hereby established in the District Court in designated counties.

(2) Pilot counties shall be selected by the Administrative Director of the Courts with approval by the Chief Justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

(3) In each pilot county, courtroom(s) will be equipped with appropriate software equipment provided by the Administrative Office of the Courts.

(4) The following rules governing the Speech to Text Recording and Cloud Storage Pilot Program are hereby adopted to be codified at Part XIV of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules, Okla. Stat. tit. 12, app.1, and are attached as Exhibit A to this Order.

The court promulgated a number of rules.  “These Rules authorize the use of speech to text recording and cloud storage technology in all stages of civil or criminal proceedings.”

It is the intent of the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma that the benefits of speech to text recording and cloud storage technology should be assessed through a pilot program before statewide implementation in the District Court where court reporter vacancies exist. The use of speech to text recording and cloud storage capabilities shall be consistent with the limitations of the technology, the rights of litigants and other participants in all matters before the courts. The Court finds the benefits of speech to text recording and cloud storage technology include, but are not limited to, accurate preservation of the hearing record, employee placement and management of court resources by allowing court reporter flexibility to all courts of the state, decreased travel and transportation costs, and minimizing judicial delay by reason of the unavailability of local court reporters.

The rules provide: “The recording, any portion of the recording process, and any data or files generated, captured, or maintained in connection with the recording shall not be used to train, develop, or improve any artificial intelligence or machine learning model….”

A Judge may delay a proceeding and require court reporting after consideration of a number of factors such as: “Whether a physical liberty or other fundamental interest is at stake in the proceeding….”  Stipulations of the parties should be considered.

“Only a certified court reporter may review, prepare, and certify a transcript of a proceeding.”

Electronic recordings, speech-to-text produced preliminary transcripts, and metadata of such recordings and speech-to-text produced preliminary transcripts created through speech-to-text technology are judicial work-product, and do not constitute the official record of the case.

The rules apply to only pilot courts in pilot counties.

One Member of the Court dissented: “Today the majority adopts Speech to Text rules without asking or seeking input from the reporters Task Force formed in 2017 and actively meeting for nearly 10 years. Input and advice from the very industry affected here should have been encouraged, not ignored.  I dissent.”