Rule 261. Policy.
A. It is the policy of the UJS to provide meaningful language access to the courts for all individuals who are Limited English Proficient (‘‘LEP’’) or deaf or hard of hearing (‘‘DHH’’) to ensure that such persons have due process and equal access to all judicial proceedings, court services, programs, and activities. Ensuring meaningful language access means providing timely, accurate, and effective language services at no cost to persons who are LEP or DHH, whether requested or not.
B. Courts must review data concerning the languages for which interpreters are most frequently requested in their courts and translate vital documents in accordance with the policy and procedures established by the Administrative Office. Oral translation of documents shall be provided when a translated document is not available.
C. A qualified interpreter shall be provided for any court services, programs, or activities involving an LEP person and in every judicial proceeding where the LEP person is one of the following:
1. a principal party in interest.
2. any person when a court finds good cause for provision of interpreter services.
D. A qualified interpreter shall be provided for any court services, programs, or activities involving a DHH person and in every judicial proceeding where the DHH person is one of the following:
1. a principal party in interest.
2. any person, including a spectator, who seeks a reasonable accommodation.
Comment Equal access to the courts and effective communication in court proceedings is fundamental to the legitimacy of Pennsylvania’s system of justice and the public’s trust and confidence in the courts. Language services for individuals who are LEP or DHH are essential to ensure that they are able to fully participate in judicial proceedings and court services, programs, and activities in which their rights and interests are at stake. Moreover, the courts have an interest in ensuring the integrity of communications with LEP and DHH court users for the accurate presentation of evidence and the fair administration of justice.
The UJS is committed to ensuring meaningful access to LEP court users. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that ‘‘[n]o person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.’’ 42 U.S.C. § 2000d; see also Department of Justice regulations regarding implementation of Title VI at 28 C.F.R. § 42.101 et seq. (‘‘Title VI’’ as used in these Rules refers collectively to the statute and its implementing regulations.)
In addition to federal law, the Pennsylvania Interpreter Act, Act 172 of 2006, requires the appointment of qualified interpreters for judicial proceedings. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412. Act 172 and its implementing regulations direct that interpretation must be in person, except in certain circumstances where telephone or video remote interpretation may be used. See 204 Pa. Code § 221.104 (relating to remote interpretation).
For persons who are DHH, meaningful access to the courts is required under 204 Pa. Code Ch. 221, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § § 12131 et seq., the Pennsylvania Interpreter Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § § 4401 et seq., and various regulations, 28 C.F.R. § § 42.101 et seq. and 28 C.F.R. § § 39.101 et seq., implementing these laws.
Meaningful access to the courts also includes meaningful access to court programs, services, and activities that are administered under the authority of the courts. The providers of such programs may receive federal funding and, therefore, may be independently required under Title VI to provide such access. In addition, there is an obligation to provide sign language interpreters and any other reasonable accommodations necessary to afford deaf and hard of hearing court users equally effective communications under the Americans with Disabilities Act, regardless of whether the vendor providing the program or service receives federal funds. A party who is LEP or DHH should not be required to participate in a program, service, or activity if the party is not able to fully participate or understand on account of language or disability. Courts should consider whether alternatives may be made available and, if not, whether a waiver of the required court program, service, or activity may be permitted.
Except in courtroom proceedings, effective communication with persons who are LEP or DHH can also be facilitated through the use of court staff who are proficient in languages other than English, in accordance with the Administrative Office’s policy on bilingual employees.
Source The provisions of this Rule 261 added November 19, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7409.
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
