| | |
|
NoahJosephFirstEssay 3 - 24 Feb 2021 - Main.NoahJoseph
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | | | Non-English Speakers | |
<
< | Americans who have limited understanding of any dialect of English are the ones who face the greatest linguistic exclusion from the legal system. According to the U.S. Census, over 25 million U.S. residents over the age of 5 speak English “less than very well.” This accounts for almost 9% of the population within this age range. This entire segment of the U.S. population cannot participate in the legal system in the way that it was designed. Much of the premise of our current legal system is based on the assumption that the people who are governed by this system are aware of its rules. This idea is encapsulated by the well-known maxim: “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” But how can someone know the law if they do not know the language in which it is written? This issue is especially disheartening in light of the legal system’s inhumane treatment of immigrants, who make up a significant portion of foreign language speakers in the United States. Ironically, those who are most frequently subjected to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s brutality are also those who are in the worst linguistic position to understand ICE’s policies and procedures. | >
> | Americans who have limited understanding of any dialect of English are the ones who face the greatest linguistic exclusion from the legal system. According to the U.S. Census, over 25 million U.S. residents over the age of 5 speak English “less than very well.” (https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2013/demo/2009-2013-lang-tables.html). This accounts for almost 9% of the population within this age range. This entire segment of the U.S. population cannot participate in the legal system in the way that it was designed. Much of the premise of our current legal system is based on the assumption that the people who are governed by this system are aware of its rules. This idea is encapsulated by the well-known maxim: “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” But how can someone know the law if they do not know the language in which it is written? This issue is especially disheartening in light of the legal system’s inhumane treatment of immigrants, who make up a significant portion of foreign language speakers in the United States. Ironically, those who are most frequently subjected to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s brutality are also those who are in the worst linguistic position to understand ICE’s policies and procedures. | | | Translation | | | Rachel Jeantel | |
<
< | Moreover, this problem can actually go both ways. Just as speakers of AAVE may have additional trouble communicating in the arcane legal register based on standard English, speakers of standard English have also had trouble understanding speakers of AAVE in legal contexts. A troubling example of this was the testimony of Rachel Jeantel during the trial of George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2012. Jeantel was a friend of Martin’s and the two had been speaking on the phone before and during the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin. However, the transcribers, attorneys, and jury members involved in this trial had notable difficulty understanding the nuances of Jantel’s AAVE. This lack of understanding, along with centuries of racial prejudice towards speakers of AAVE, may have played a significant role in the jury’s assessment of Jeantel’s testimony, and ultimately in Zimmerman’s acquittal. | >
> | Moreover, this problem can actually go both ways. Just as speakers of AAVE may have additional trouble communicating in the arcane legal register based on standard English, speakers of standard English have also had trouble understanding speakers of AAVE in legal contexts. A troubling example of this was the testimony of Rachel Jeantel during the trial of George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2012. (https://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/december/vernacular-trial-testimony-120214.html) Jeantel was a friend of Martin’s and the two had been speaking on the phone before and during the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin. However, the transcribers, attorneys, and jury members involved in this trial had notable difficulty understanding the nuances of Jantel’s AAVE. This lack of understanding, along with centuries of racial prejudice towards speakers of AAVE, may have played a significant role in the jury’s assessment of Jeantel’s testimony, and ultimately in Zimmerman’s acquittal. | | | Conclusion |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |