BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1127
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1127 (Chau)
As Amended May 24, 2013
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 8-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Alejo, Chau, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Dickinson, Garcia, | |Bradford, |
| |Gorell, Muratsuchi, Stone | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Eggman, Gomez, Hall, |
| | | |Ammiano, Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Wagner, Maienschein |Nays:|Harkey, Bigelow, |
| | | |Donnelly, Linder, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Directs the Judicial Council to create a task force
for the purpose of developing a statewide Language Access Plan.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires that on or before March 1, 2014, the Judicial Council
shall establish the California Language Access Task Force,
which shall be responsible for developing a comprehensive
statewide Language Access Plan (LAP) for use by courts to
address the needs of limited-English-proficient individuals.
2)Specifies that the composition of the task force shall include
court executive officers, presiding judges, interpreter
coordinators, interpreters, at least two of whom shall be
nominated by an exclusive representative of interpreter
employees, representatives of legal services organizations and
organizations representing individuals with limited English
proficiency, and others the Judicial Council determines
necessary. The working group shall also include a
representative from a rural community in order to highlight
the particular challenges of providing court interpreter
services in rural communities.
3)Provides that in developing the LAP, the task force shall do
all of the following:
AB 1127
Page 2
a) Establish standards for meaningful and timely access to
language services in all court proceedings and at all
public points of contact within the courts.
b) Establish procedures for gathering comprehensive data on
the language access needs of court users, including, but
not limited to, providing a means of registering an
individual's language needs in court documents. These
procedures should provide metrics on the need for
interpreter services in court proceedings and ancillary
programs and services.
c) Review current court interpreter procedures and
recommend improvements or additional procedures to provide
the most competent interpreter services to
limited-English-proficient court users and to ensure
compliance with Rule 2.890 of the California Rules of
Court.
d) Review current court procedures and recommend
improvements or additional procedures to maximize existing
language resources, including bilingual staff, court
interpreters, translators, and other resources shared among
courts to expand access to language services at all public
points of contact within the courts.
e) Review current practices and develop strategies to
provide interpreter services that comply with the Trial
Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act in all
court proceedings. The review may include the evaluation of
any programs providing interpreters in domestic violence
cases or other civil cases, including any pilot projects.
f) Establish a statewide plan to provide for the
translation of court documents using competent and
qualified interpreters.
g) Establish a plan to provide education and training to
judicial officers, court personnel, and court-appointed
professionals on the legal requirements for language
access, court policies and rules pertaining to language
access, language service provider qualifications, ethics
pertaining to interpreter services, the effective use of
AB 1127
Page 3
translated court documents, and effective techniques for
working with language service providers.
h) Review and consider the American Bar Association's
Standards for Language Access in Courts, as adopted
February 2012.
4)Requires the task force to provide the LAP to the Judicial
Council by September 1, 2014, and the Judicial Council to
adopt a statewide LAP on or before December 31, 2014.
5)Provides that the foregoing provisions shall be implemented
upon the appropriation of funding for these purposes.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, in order to complete the LAP, one-time General Fund
costs in the range of $175,000 for staff of the Administrative
Office of the Courts to support the work of the task force and
for the participation of judicial officers and other court
personnel on the task force. Minor ongoing costs to maintain
and update the LAP.
To the extent the plan is implemented statewide, the courts
could incur significant ongoing costs. According to the bill,
elements of the plan are to include: provision by the trial
courts of comprehensive data on the language access needs of
court users; strategies to provide interpreter services in all
court proceedings; a statewide plan for the translation of court
documents; and providing relevant education and training to
judicial offers, court personnel, and court-appointed
professionals.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "AB 1127 would provide
Californians with an explicitly recognized right to equal access
to the courts without regard to language proficiency by creating
a comprehensive language access plan. According to the 2010
Census, California is the most populous state in the nation with
over 37 million people, and is home to one of the world's most
diverse populations. California language access law consists of
a patchwork of statutes, rules and policies. Furthermore, the
landscape for language access standards nationwide is changing
due to the U.S. Department of Justice enforcement of language
access requirements under federal civil rights laws. AB 1127
would create a statewide Language Access Plan which will develop
AB 1127
Page 4
specific recommendations for court officials and staff to
address language access issues in our court systems."
In policy guidance issued August 16, 2010, and in a significant
number of enforcement actions in recent years, the United States
Department of Justice (U.S. DOJ) has made it clear that language
access in the courts is a required element of state compliance
with federal anti-discrimination law when states receive federal
financial assistance. State anti-discrimination law is to the
same effect, except that unlike federal law it provides a
private right of action. In the context of court services, U.S.
DOJ has made clear that this obligation includes both
interpreters in court proceedings and the provision of other
public points of contact, such as court clerks and other
personnel. (See United States Department of Justice letter to
state court administrators, Aug, 16, 2010, available at
http://www.lep.gov/final_courts_ltr_081610.pdf.)
According to supporters and independent research it appears that
there is no statewide language access plan for the court system,
although individual courts have adopted documents bearing the
title language access plan. It seems plain that the Judicial
Council currently has the full legal authority needed to
establish a language access plan and to take the further steps
needed to comply with the law whether or not this bill becomes
law. However, it is believed that no such effort has been
undertaken. Undoubtedly, there may be cost concerns. But the
DOJ has made it clear that cost is not a defense to
noncompliance. Failure to take appropriate action may subject
the state to federal enforcement action or to a private lawsuit
under cognate state law.
Supporters argue that the creation of a language access plan is
a critical first step toward getting the judicial branch in
compliance with existing civil rights laws. This bill would
direct the Judicial Council to establish a task force
responsible for drafting a language access plan with defined
dates and composition.
Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0000945
AB 1127
Page 5