BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1657
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 7, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1657 (Gomez) - As Amended: April 29, 2014
Policy Committee:
JudiciaryVote:10-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill clarifies the provision of court interpreter services
in civil cases in a manner consistent with other state and
federal laws. Specifically, this bill:
1) Requires the Judicial Council, to the extent required by
other state and federal law, to reimburse courts for court
interpreter services as needed by parties in civil cases.
2) Establishes priorities, by type of case, for the
expansion of court interpreter services, to the extent
appropriated funds are insufficient to provide an
interpreter to every party eligible for one, with priority
for indigent litigants in family law matters.
3) Clarifies that no party shall be charged for the
provision of a court interpreter.
FISCAL EFFECT
No direct fiscal impact, as this bill does not add any
requirements to current state and federal law regarding the
provision of court interpreters. The judiciary currently has
about $13 million in funds available-from prior budget surpluses
of funds appropriated for interpreter services. Within any
amounts available now and in the future, the bill establishes
funding priorities by case type.
COMMENTS
1) Background . The Judicial Council is currently under
AB 1657
Page 2
investigation by the United States Department of Justice
(DOJ) in response to a complaint filed by the Legal Aid
Foundation of Los Angeles alleging unlawful discrimination
against Limited English Proficient (LEP) court users on the
basis of national origin/language. Specifically, the
complaint alleges the Los Angeles Superior Court fails
(LASC) to provide LEP individuals with full and equal
access to court services in that, among other shortcomings,
the court fails to provide interpreter services in all
civil actions and proceedings, and/or conditions access to
such services on the payment of a fee. While the complaint
named the LASC expressly, the issues it raises appear to be
systemic throughout the courts.
On May 22, 2013, the DOJ Civil Rights Division issued a letter
to the Judicial Council setting forth a summary of
observations and recommendations as of that point in the
investigation. Specifically, the DOJ indicated that "several
current policies, practices and procedures regarding the
provision of language assistance services in LASC appear to be
inconsistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964."
2) Purpose . The Judicial Council, sponsor of this bill, has
recommended clarifying there is no statutory impediment
that prevents trial courts from being reimbursed for all
appropriate interpreter services in civil matters. The DOJ
also suggested that, to the extent there are concerns about
exceeding expenditure authority, the courts may wish to
prioritize those sensitive matters where the consequences
of ineffective communication between parties and the courts
are particularly onerous, including domestic violence,
civil harassment, family law matters, and unlawful
detainer. The DOJ also advised that, as the court system
works toward ensuring that interpreters are provided to
litigants in all civil matters, the courts may recognize
the particular importance of providing services to indigent
litigants who are eligible for fee waivers.
This bill carries forth those recommendations by (a) making
clear that trial courts shall be reimbursed for interpreter
services to the full extent required by state or federal law
in civil actions and proceedings; and (b) establishing that as
full compliance with interpreter obligations is phased-in,
AB 1657
Page 3
indigent parties in the most sensitive civil matters receive
first priority.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081