When interpreting does not remove the language barrier: interpreter ethics at odds with due process

This Note follows the historical presence of interpreters in U.S. courts and the evolution of court decisions regarding the rights of Limited English Proficient (LEP)0F individuals to have an interpreter in order to safeguard their constitutional rights. The overview of documented cases is divided into two timeframes: from 1683 to 1967, before the landmark case of ex Rel Negron, then 1967 to the present, after the Negron case set the wheels in motion for the enactment of the Court Interpreters Act and a progeny of other court decisions that solidified the right to an interpreter as a matter of due process. With this backdrop, the Note then discusses current codes of professional ethics for judiciary interpreters and how some of those deontological directives may be subverting the very raison de être for interpreters in the U.S. court system.