Record watch: transcription and justice in Canada and the U.S. — mid-October 2026

Texas: the state Supreme Court hears the AI transcript case

On October 6, 2026, the Supreme Court of Texas heard In re Hughey (No. 25‑0463), which we covered in our late-September watch. Patrick Hughey is suing his former employer, Reddico Construction, for wrongful termination. He recorded the deposition of a company representative with Skribe.ai, software that transcribes with the help of artificial intelligence, without a court reporter. The Montgomery County trial court struck the transcript in April 2025 because no certified shorthand reporter had prepared it, and the court of appeals declined to step in. According to Bloomberg Law, several justices suggested that the savings may outweigh the risk of errors; Justice Evan Young noted that the video recording allows the transcript to be checked and that a trial court can always require a certified reporter. Justice Jane Bland asked the opposite question, Courthouse News reports: who stands behind a transcript that a party wants to use as if a person had attested to it? A decision is pending.

Why it matters: Justice Bland’s question is the one every court will end up asking; a transcript is worth what the person who answers for it is worth.

Oklahoma: recording courtrooms for lack of court reporters

On October 7, 2026, Senator Christi Gillespie and Representative Derrick Hildebrant held an interim study at the Oklahoma Legislature on audio and video recording in courtrooms. According to Chief Justice Dustin Rowe, 75 of the state’s 198 court reporter positions are vacant; in some counties, one reporter serves several judges. The proposal under discussion: a three-year pilot in 12 courtrooms with permanently mounted recording equipment, at an estimated cost of US$2.3 million. Senator Gillespie said it is not about livestreaming hearings, and that a certified court reporter would still certify any official transcript. The Chief Justice warned that recordings could be clipped and manipulated on social media; Laura Griffin, a court reporter for 37 years, argued that recordings “should not replace the guardian of the record.” A bill along these lines did not pass the Senate last session; lawmakers are continuing their review.

Why it matters: even where courts record for lack of reporters, a person still certifies the transcript; a recording preserves the evidence, it does not put it in writing.

Ottawa: both official languages in federal AI

On October 8, 2026, Commissioner of Official Languages Kelly Burke tabled her office’s 2025–2026 annual report in Parliament, covering the final year of her predecessor, Raymond Théberge. The office received 4,110 admissible complaints, 3,632 of them about communications with and services to the public. The Commissioner recommends that, by March 31, 2027, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat build official languages into the federal public service’s artificial intelligence strategy and its guide on generative AI. According to Le Droit, she stressed that AI can carry linguistic and cultural biases, and that it must never lower the quality of service in either language.

Why it matters: an AI tool is not neutral between French and English; a bilingual transcript has to be as accurate in one language as in the other, and that is checked by listening.

What we take from it

Three places, one dividing line. In Texas, the question is who answers for a transcript a machine produced; in Oklahoma, courts would record, but a reporter would certify; in Ottawa, AI is asked to respect both languages. In Quebec, the guidelines on generative AI signed on August 31 by the chief justices and chief judges of Quebec’s courts already advise judges against submitting recordings to such a tool until a transcription tool has been institutionally evaluated. That is how we work: the recording first, then a person who listens to it, transcribes each language as it was spoken, and signs.

Sources

1. Bloomberg Law, “AI Transcription Savings May Outweigh Errors, Texas Justices Say” (Oct. 6, 2026)
2. Courthouse News Service, “Texas high court toys with AI transcripts for witness depositions” (Oct. 6, 2026)
3. Oklahoma Voice (via News From The States), “Lawmakers consider introducing recording to Oklahoma courtrooms to assist operations” (Oct. 7, 2026)
4. KOKH Fox 25, “Court reporter shortage prompts push for video in Oklahoma courtrooms” (Oct. 9, 2026)
5. Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, “2025–2026 annual report: Turning commitment into action” (Oct. 8, 2026)
6. Le Droit (via Le Soleil), “Air Canada redevient le cancre des langues officielles” (Oct. 8, 2026, in French)
7. Quebec chief justices, “Lignes directrices sur l’utilisation de l’intelligence artificielle générative par les juges” (Aug. 31, 2026, in French)

General information, not legal advice. Rules change and differ from one forum to the next: check the current text and what your forum requires.

Also read

• What a legal transcript is for — and who actually reads it
• Court reporter, transcriptionist, interpreter: who does what
• Record watch: transcription and justice in Canada and the U.S. — early October 2026