Janis Palma
Non-English-Speakers and Limited English Proficient individuals (jointly referred to as LEPs in this paper) who come before the courts in the United States as criminal defendants face at least two major obstacles to full comprehension of the proceedings against them: being unable to speak or understand the language of the courts and the dramatic differences between the criminal justice system in the U.S. and their home countries. These differences in legal systems are rarely, if ever, taken into account when addressing LEP populations’ due process rights. Several court opinions at the federal level prior to the 1970s culminated in the Court Interpreters Act (28 U.S.C. 1827), which triggered the creation of a nationwide interpreter certification program. Subsequently, however, an independent nonprofit organization produced a Model Code of Ethics for interpreters that has been adopted by nearly every state and professional association. Its practical effect has been to nullify all pre-existing jurisprudence concerning LEPs’ constitutional rights by imposing an accuracy canon on interpreters that disregards the intended listener’s capacity to comprehend what is being interpreted. Based on the language of applicable statutes and court decisions, I exemplify how the current accuracy standard for interpreters in legal settings jeopardizes LEP criminal defendants’ due process rights. Guided by the prevailing theories on interpreting and translation, I argue in favor of revising this section of the Code and propose a new accuracy standard for interpreters in legal settings that takes into account the intended listener while making the proper allowances for evidentiary requirements. I further propose that such standards would necessarily have to be different for each of the settings in which interpreters engage with LEP defendants throughout a criminal prosecution, from initial contact with law enforcement to imposition of sentence.
Keywords: Interpreting, court interpreting, interpreter ethics, judiciary interpreting, accuracy standards, U.S. courts, interpreter certification, translation.