The Future of American Courts: Navigating Staffing Shortages and AI Adoption

by

Hace 3 días

Key Highlights:

A recent survey reveals 68% of state courts are experiencing staffing shortages, yet only 17% have adopted generative AI technologies.
Courts recognize the potential of AI, with 55% rating it as having a high impact, yet fears of overreliance and budget constraints hinder its implementation.
As generational shifts occur in the workforce, there is an urgent need for courts to adapt to new technologies to alleviate operational pressures.

Introduction

In the complex landscape of the American judicial system, state courts find themselves at a critical juncture. Faced with severe staffing shortages and rising operational demands, many courts are struggling to keep up with their workloads. A recent survey conducted by the Thomson Reuters Institute, in collaboration with the National Center for State Courts AI Policy Consortium, has shed light on this pressing issue. Surprisingly, while courts grapple with these challenges, their adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) remains limited, despite its potential to provide significant relief. This article delves into the findings of the survey and explores the implications for the future of the judicial system.

Courts Under Strain

The survey gathered insights from 443 judges and court professionals across state, county, and municipal courts during March and April 2025. The findings paint a stark picture of a system under heavy strain. A staggering 71% of state courts and 56% of county or municipal courts reported experiencing staffing shortages within the past year. This trend is expected to continue, with 61% anticipating ongoing shortages in the next 12 months.

The consequences of these staffing issues are evident. Court professionals are working longer hours, with 53% reporting an average workload of 40 to 45 hours per week, and an additional 38% clocking over 46 hours weekly. Alarmingly, only half of the respondents felt they had sufficient time to complete their obligations, leading to burnout and decreased job satisfaction.

Furthermore, nearly half of the respondents (45%) reported an increase in their caseloads compared to the previous year, while 39% noted that the complexities of their cases have intensified. This mounting pressure is compounded by delays, with 24% indicating that court delays have increased over the past year.

AI Adoption Remains Limited

Despite the pressing need for solutions, the survey reveals a reluctance to embrace generative AI within the courts. Currently, only 17% of respondents reported that their court is utilizing generative AI technologies, while another 17% plan to adopt such technologies in the coming year. This slow uptake is striking, especially given that 55% of court professionals believe AI will have a transformational or high impact on the judicial process over the next five years.

Professionals within the courts recognize the potential efficiency gains that AI could bring. The survey indicates that court workers anticipate saving nearly three hours each week through generative AI in the next year, with that figure projected to rise to almost nine hours weekly within five years. These time savings could translate into more efficient processing of cases and reduced workloads for overburdened staff.

Barriers to AI Implementation

What is hindering the adoption of AI technologies in the judicial system? The survey identifies several barriers. A significant 70% of respondents noted that their courts do not currently allow employees to use AI tools for court-related tasks. Furthermore, 75% reported that their court has yet to provide any training on AI technologies.

Concerns regarding the implications of AI are varied but noteworthy. Over a third of respondents (35%) expressed worries about an overreliance on technology at the expense of human skill. Additionally, 25% cited fears of malicious uses of AI, including the creation of counterfeit orders and evidence. Interestingly, only 9% mentioned concerns about job loss due to AI.

Budget constraints also play a crucial role in limiting technology adoption. The survey revealed that while 22% of respondents reported an increase in their budget for the forthcoming year, 30% indicated that their budgets had decreased, and another 30% said their budgets remained unchanged.

Current Technology Landscape

While the adoption of generative AI lags, the survey indicates that many courts are making strides in implementing other essential technologies. For instance, 86% of courts have adopted case management systems, while e-filing, calendar management, and document management systems have seen adoption rates of 85%, 83%, and 82%, respectively. Virtual hearings are particularly noteworthy, with 80% of respondents stating that their court conducts or participates in such hearings.

Despite this progress, gaps in technology adoption remain. Courts are beginning to explore additional tools, including legal self-help portals, online dispute resolution, and document automation, to enhance their efficiency further.

Virtual Hearings Widely Adopted

The significant adoption of virtual hearings represents a notable shift in how courts operate. More than 40% of jurisdictions now offer virtual hearings for initial appearances, preliminary status hearings, and motion hearings. The survey indicates that such hearings have improved court efficiency, with 58% of respondents reporting decreased failure-to-appear rates and 84% noting enhanced access to justice.

However, challenges persist. A considerable portion of respondents (19%) believes that many litigants face decreased access to justice due to inadequate technological skills. The digital divide remains a concern, as individuals with lower digital literacy and limited technical support resources encounter obstacles in navigating virtual hearings.

Cybersecurity Concerns

With the increasing reliance on technology in the courts, cybersecurity emerges as a paramount concern. The survey highlights significant discrepancies in confidence regarding IT security. While 57% of respondents expressed high confidence in their IT systems' security, a troubling 22% reported feeling “not at all confident” in their systems' safety. As courts continue to digitize their operations, ensuring robust cybersecurity measures will be critical to maintaining trust and integrity within the judicial process.

Generational Workforce Changes

Another factor contributing to the current landscape of the courts is the generational shift within the workforce. As Baby Boomers and Gen Xers retire, Gen Zers are entering the workforce, often bringing with them different expectations and comfort levels with technology. The survey indicates that these changes are frequently viewed as transformational or high-impact trends.

Gen Zers, as digital natives, are adept at using technology and may find it easier to manage automated workflows. However, they may resist roles that rely heavily on manual tasks, necessitating a shift in how courts engage with and utilize technology.

Reducing Operational Errors

The survey sheds light on the areas where courts face operational inefficiencies and high error rates. One of the most error-prone tasks identified is entering and updating data in court management systems. This task is also ranked as the second-most inefficient, suggesting that increased automation could lead to significant improvements in both efficiency and accuracy. Addressing workflow inefficiencies can enhance staff satisfaction while simultaneously improving the user experience for those navigating the court system.

A Critical Juncture for Courts

The findings of the survey present a stark choice for courts: either embrace AI technologies that could significantly alleviate operational pressures or risk falling further behind as staffing challenges and workloads continue to escalate. David Slayton, executive officer and clerk of court for the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, emphasizes the urgency of addressing these challenges. “Staff don’t think they have enough time to meet their demands, and they’re working more hours to get the work done, and that’s leading to burnout,” he notes.

Mike Abbott, head of the Thomson Reuters Institute, reiterates the need for courts to adapt. “Courts are facing an unprecedented convergence of change, driven by generative AI and generational shifts in their workforce, at the same time as they continue to deal with staff shortages, backlogs, and delays,” he states. “AI literacy can empower the courts to understand both the risks and the opportunities associated with the technology, enabling them to identify the best use cases which help them focus on higher value work.”

FAQ

What is the main finding of the survey regarding staffing shortages in courts? The survey revealed that 68% of state courts are experiencing staffing shortages, leading to increased workloads and stress for court professionals.

Why is AI adoption in courts so low despite its potential benefits? Only 17% of courts are currently using generative AI due to various barriers, including concerns about overreliance on technology, lack of training, and budget constraints.

What technologies are courts currently using? Most courts have adopted essential technologies such as case management systems (86%), e-filing (85%), and virtual hearings (80%).

How do virtual hearings impact court efficiency? Virtual hearings have been shown to reduce failure-to-appear rates and increase access to justice, although challenges related to digital literacy persist among litigants.

What role do generational shifts play in court operations? As Baby Boomers and Gen Xers retire, Gen Zers are entering the workforce, bringing different technological expectations that could influence how courts adopt and implement new technologies.

The survey findings present a clear need for courts to reevaluate their approach to technology and staffing. Embracing generative AI could prove crucial in alleviating operational pressures and improving the overall efficacy of the judicial system.

Carrito de compra