March 19, 2026
Ms. Hageman (for herself and Mr. Stauber) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To establish a task force to address legal and ethical issues related to the use of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system, and for other purposes.
Section 1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the Research and Oversight of AI in Courts Act of 2026
.
Sec. 2. AI research and oversight in courts task force
(a) Purpose
The purpose of this Act is to provide Congress with—
(1)
an analysis of any issues or benefits related to the use of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system;
(2)
a review of the use of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system; and
(3)
any recommendations based on the analysis and review conducted under paragraphs (1) and (2).
(b) Establishment of task force
Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General of the United States, acting through the Director of the National Institute of Justice, shall establish a task force (to be known as the AI Research and Oversight in Courts Task Force
) to assess the feasibility, accuracy, privacy, and civil liberty implications of using AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system.
(c) Task force duties
The duties of the task force established under subsection (b) shall be to—
(1)
assess policy findings, regulatory findings, and legal findings with respect to the use of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system; and
(2)
make recommendations to Congress, the executive branch, and the judicial branch for any judicial, legislative, or regulatory reforms to ensure the use of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system does not infringe upon any rights under the Constitution of the United States, including the litigant’s right to an accurate official court record.
(d) Task force appointees
(1) Composition
The task force established under subsection (b) shall be composed of 15 members, to be appointed by the Director of the National Institute of Justice, as follows:
(A)
4 members employed by the Federal Government in at least one of the following capacities:
(i)
As an employee of the National Institute of Justice.
(ii)
As an employee of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.
(iii)
As a clerk of court.
(iv)
As a Federal judge.
(v)
As a Federal prosecutor.
(B)
11 members not employed by the Federal Government, which shall include the following individuals:
(i)
An individual who is a member of a professional association that specializes in the official record making process of the United States judicial system and in the technology used for such record keeping.
(ii)
An individual who is a specialist in civil liberty law.
(iii)
An active State court judge or a retired Federal court judge with experience reversing a ruling because of a written or audible deficiency in the official court record.
(2) Eligibility
A member appointed under paragraph (1)(B) to the task force established under subsection (b), may not be employed by, contracted with, receive compensation from, or otherwise represent any entity that develops, markets, sells, or provides artificial intelligence technologies or related services.
(3) Required expertise
Members appointed to the task force established under subsection (b) under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall have expertise in—
(A)
the official record making process in the United States judicial system; or
(B)
the technology used by the United States judicial system to create and modify a court record.
(4) Co-chairs
The Director of the National Institute of Justice shall designate as co-chairs of the task force established under subsection (b)—
(A)
1 member appointed to the task force under paragraph (1)(A); and
(B)
1 member appointed to the task force under paragraph (1)(B).
(5) Vacancies
In the case of a vacancy on the task force established under subsection (b), the co-chairs appointed under paragraph (4) shall appoint a new member not later than 15 days after the vacancy occurs.
(6) Compensation
(A) Federal employees
Each member of the task force established under subsection (b) appointed under paragraph (1)(A) of this subsection shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for services as an employee of the United States.
(B) Other members
Each member appointed to the task force established under subsection (b) under paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection shall serve without compensation.
(C) Reimbursement
Each member appointed to the task force established under subsection (b) under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business while carrying out the duties described under subsection (c).
(e) Final report
Not later than 18 months after the task force is established under subsection (b), the task force shall submit to the Attorney General, the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a final report on the following:
(1)
Whether a court record created or modified by AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology affects the quality or accuracy of a transcription of a legal proceeding.
(2)
Whether AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology alters any comments made in a courtroom by an individual with a speech impediment, unique speech pattern, accent, or dialect.
(3)
Whether using AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to perform tasks in the United States judicial system will increase or decrease costs for litigants.
(4)
An assessment of any cybersecurity risks associated with using AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to perform tasks in the United States judicial system.
(5)
An assessment of any other risks associated with using AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to analyze or process a court record and perform tasks in the United States judicial system.
(6)
An assessment of any effects on the data integrity, authenticity, or preservation of the evidentiary value of a court record when using AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to manage, process, and store such court record.
(7)
Whether implementing AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to conduct managerial and administrative tasks in the United States judicial system will increase or decrease court expenditures.
(8)
Whether a court record created or modified by AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology should display a watermark, header, footer, or banner to indicate that such court record was created or modified by such technology.
(9)
Whether a watermark, header, footer, or banner described under paragraph (8) should be displayed permanently on a court record.
(10)
Whether metadata should be included in a court record created or modified by AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology, including—
(A)
which AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology tool was used to create or modify such record;
(B)
which version of the AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology was used to create or modify such record; and
(C)
any changes made by such technology to such record.
(11)
Whether the United States judicial system should provide guidance on the selection process of vendors providing AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology to ensure the safety and privacy of parties and individuals involved in the United States judicial system.
(12)
Whether the use of AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system compromises the accuracy or integrity of a court record.
(13)
Whether the use of AI speech-to-text technology or automatic speech recognition technology in the United States judicial system causes any disruptions during a judicial proceeding.
(14)
An analysis of any potential future developments and advancements of AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology within 10 years of the date of enactment of this Act, and how the United States judicial system should adjust its policies to keep pace with the quickly evolving technology.
(15)
Any recommendations for policies to be implemented in the United States judicial system with respect to AI speech-to-text technology and automatic speech recognition technology.
(f) Status report
Not later than 4 months after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 4 months thereafter until the task force established under subsection (b) submits the final report under subsection (e), the task force shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on—
(1)
the status of the final report; and
(2)
whether the final report will be submitted to such committees by the deadline established under subsection (e).
(g) Termination
The task force established under subsection (b) shall terminate, and this Act shall cease to be effective, upon the date of submission of the final report under subsection (e).
(h) Definitions
In this section:
(1) AI speech-to-text technology
The term AI speech-to-text technology means a machine-based system that uses artificial intelligence, including machine learning and natural language processing, to automatically perceive, analyze, and convert human speech into written text or machine-readable data, enabling real-time transcription, accessibility, and interaction with digital systems.
(2) Automatic speech recognition technology
The term automatic speech recognition technology means a technology that processes human speech and converts it into a written or machine-readable format without using artificial intelligence to facilitate communication and accessibility.
(3) United States judicial system
The term United States judicial system means all State and Federal courts in the United States and the territories of the United States.