A brand new survey of state courts reveals a hanging paradox within the American judicial system: Though courts face extreme staffing shortages and operational pressure, they continue to be reluctant to undertake generative synthetic intelligence applied sciences that might present important aid.
The Thomson Reuters Institute’s third annual survey of state courts, performed in partnership with the Nationwide Heart for State Courts AI Coverage Consortium, discovered that 68% of courts reported workers shortages and 48% of court docket professionals say they don’t have sufficient time to get their work achieved.
Regardless of these pressures, nevertheless, simply 17% say their court docket is utilizing gen AI at the moment.
Courts Below Pressure
The survey, which gathered responses from 443 state, county, and municipal court docket judges and professionals between March and April 2025, paints an image of courts below important pressure.
Seventy-one % of state courts and 56% of county/municipal courts skilled workers shortages prior to now 12 months, with 61% anticipating continued shortages within the subsequent 12 months.
This staffing disaster interprets into demanding work schedules, with 53% of respondents saying they work between 40 and 45 hours every week on common, and a further 38% working over 46 hours every week.
Maybe most telling, solely half of court docket professionals mentioned they’d sufficient time to get their work achieved.
These workload pressures are solely getting worse. Almost half of respondents (45%) reported a rise of their caseloads in comparison with final 12 months and 39% mentioned the problems they’re coping with have turn out to be extra complicated.
In the meantime, 24% of respondents reported will increase in court docket delays, in comparison with 18% who reported decreases.
AI Adoption Stays Restricted
In opposition to this backdrop of operational pressure, the survey reveals a cautious method to AI adoption that appears at odds with the expertise’s potential advantages.
Presently, solely 17% of respondents mentioned their court docket was utilizing gen AI, and a further 17% mentioned their court docket was planning to undertake gen AI expertise over the following 12 months.
This sluggish adoption happens regardless of widespread recognition of AI’s transformative potential, with 55% of respondents ranking AI and gen AI as having a transformational or excessive affect on courts over the following 5 years.
The survey discovered that AI and gen AI is the highest-ranking impactful development, rated as transformational or excessive affect by 55% of respondents.
Courtroom professionals clearly see the effectivity advantages AI may present. Courtroom professionals predict that within the subsequent 12 months, gen AI will assist them save a mean of practically three hours every week, rising to almost 9 hours every week inside 5 years.
The projected time financial savings could possibly be substantial: Respondents estimate they may save a mean of practically three hours each week within the subsequent 12 months, rising to almost six hours every week inside three years and eight.8 hours every week inside 5 years.
Limitations to AI Implementation
So what’s holding courts again? The survey identifies a number of components contributing to courts’ cautious AI adoption.
Seventy % of respondents mentioned their courts are at present not permitting workers to make use of AI-based instruments for court docket enterprise, and 75% of respondents mentioned their court docket has not but offered any AI coaching.
There are additionally assorted however important issues about AI implementation.
Greater than a 3rd (35%) are nervous that AI will result in an overreliance on expertise fairly than talent, whereas 1 / 4 have issues about malicious use of AI, comparable to counterfeit orders and proof. Curiously, solely 9% have been nervous about widespread job loss ensuing from AI.
Price range constraints might also play a job in limiting expertise adoption. The survey discovered that 22% say their finances for the following 12 months elevated, whereas 30% mentioned budgets decreased, and 30% say budgets stayed the identical.
Present Know-how Panorama
Whereas AI adoption lags, courts have made progress implementing different applied sciences. Most courts have adopted key applied sciences, together with case administration (86%), e-filing (85%), calendar administration (83%), and doc administration (82%).
Video conferencing has reached near-universal adoption at 88%.
Nevertheless, some expertise gaps stay. Past gen AI, the most typical applied sciences set to be adopted subsequent are authorized self-help portals, on-line dispute decision and doc automation.
Digital Hearings Extensively Adopted
The survey reveals important adoption of digital hearings, with 80% of respondents saying their court docket conducts or participates in digital hearings.
In additional than 40% of all jurisdictions, digital hearings can be found for first/preliminary appearances, preliminary/standing hearings and/or movement hearings.
Digital hearings seem to enhance court docket effectivity in some areas. 58% of respondents reported that digital courts lower failure to seem charges, and 84% reported that digital courts enhance entry to justice.
Nevertheless, the digital divide presents ongoing challenges. Almost one in 5 respondents (19%) really feel that almost all of litigants are experiencing decreased entry to justice as a result of they lack robust expertise expertise.
Courtroom entry for individuals with decrease digital literacy and fewer technical help assets have been ranked as the highest challenges for litigants concerned in digital hearings.
Cybersecurity Issues
As courts more and more depend on expertise, cybersecurity emerges as a vital concern. The survey reveals important variation in confidence ranges relating to IT safety.
Whereas 57% of respondents really feel extremely assured of their IT programs’ safety, an alarming 22% of respondents say they’re “by no means assured” within the safety of their IT programs.
Generational Workforce Adjustments
The survey identifies generational workforce shifts as one other main issue affecting courts. Child Boomers and Gen Xers exiting the office, together with Gen Zers coming into the workforce and Millennials shifting into management positions, are tendencies ceaselessly ranked as transformational or excessive affect.
These demographic modifications have necessary implications for expertise adoption. Because the report notes, Gen Zers are digital natives who’re very snug utilizing expertise and should discover it simpler to handle automated workflows, whereas they could be immune to jobs and duties that also rely closely on handbook duties.
Lowering Operational Errors
The survey gives insights about activity effectivity and error charges in court docket operations.
Coming into and updating knowledge in court docket administration programs was rated as each probably the most error-prone activity by a large margin and likewise because the second-most inefficient activity. This discovering means that better use of automation in CMS entry may yield main enhancements in each effectivity and error charges.
The survey additionally discovered correlations between totally different operational challenges. Duties which can be extra demanding are additionally correlated with inflicting inconvenience for court docket customers, suggesting that addressing workflow inefficiencies may concurrently enhance each workers satisfaction and consumer expertise.
A Crucial Juncture for Courts
The survey means that courts face a strategic selection: embrace AI applied sciences that might considerably alleviate operational pressures, or danger falling additional behind as staffing challenges intensify and workloads proceed to develop.
“We’re going through challenges — workers don’t assume they’ve sufficient time to fulfill their calls for, they usually’re working extra hours to get the work achieved, and that’s resulting in burnout,” mentioned David Slayton, government officer and clerk of court docket for the Superior Courtroom of Los Angeles County.
“It’s incumbent on court docket leaders to actually take into consideration how expertise may also help us with this downside.”
Mike Abbott, head of Thomson Reuters Institute, underscored the urgency of the scenario.
“Courts are going through an unprecedented convergence of change, pushed by generative AI and generational shifts of their workforce, concurrently they proceed to take care of workers shortages, backlogs and delays,” Abbott mentioned.
“AI literacy can empower the courts to know each the dangers and the alternatives related to the expertise, enabling them to establish the perfect use circumstances which assist them give attention to greater worth work.”
