By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction mandating the White House to immediately provide American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation during press briefings when the President or Press Secretary are speaking. This ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) and two deaf men, alleging the White House’s failure to provide ASL violates the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. The judge rejected the White House’s arguments that closed captioning alone constitutes a reasonable accommodation, emphasizing the importance of ASL for deaf individuals. The order, however, does not yet extend to events led by the Vice President, First Lady, or on all White House media.
Read the original article here
Judge orders White House to use American Sign Language interpreters at briefings, and it’s certainly a development that sparks a lot of thoughts and feelings. It seems that when the White House stopped providing live ASL interpreters at briefings, there was a real disconnect for a significant portion of the population – those who are deaf or hard of hearing. Considering that a good chunk of the American population experiences some level of hearing difficulty, making sure they can access information is simply a matter of inclusivity and fairness.
The initial reaction from some corners, it seems, is a blend of skepticism and even outright resistance. You can almost anticipate the predictable pushback: perhaps accusations of an “activist judge,” or attempts to downplay the significance of the order. It wouldn’t be surprising to see efforts to undermine the judge’s decision, possibly by delaying compliance or finding loopholes. This all boils down to an administration’s possible aversion to being held accountable and the spotlight being on anyone other than the “Dear Leader” or their messengers.
Thinking about the practicality of this order, the role of an interpreter isn’t just about translating words; it’s about conveying the full context, the tone, and even the nuances of what’s being said. Especially when dealing with the, let’s say, *colorful* language often used in political discourse, the interpreter’s task becomes even more crucial. The idea of having to translate some of the more… *unorthodox* statements into sign language is certainly an interesting image. But, with a significant number of people relying on ASL for information, it’s about equal access.
The importance of this order also highlights the broader issue of accessibility. It’s a reminder that inclusivity should extend beyond mere words and actually manifest in practical actions. Captions are helpful, of course, but for many who are deaf or hard of hearing, especially those for whom English isn’t their first language, ASL interpretation is vital. The fact that the White House had previously stopped providing this service underscores a real and very unfortunate gap in the public’s understanding of this need. It’s also interesting to consider the historical context here, with some of the comments referencing the disturbing treatment of disabled people in the past. It’s worth remembering that accessibility isn’t just a convenience; it’s a fundamental right.
Then there’s the inevitable question of whether this will be a straightforward process. Will they hire a skilled interpreter, or will we end up with a repeat of a previous situation where the interpretation was… less than accurate? There’s also the challenge of translating the sometimes-unconventional language of the administration, including the need to create new signs on the fly for neologisms like “covfefe.” The sign language community already has a sign for Trump: simulating his hair flapping in the wind. This is all on top of the already difficult task of interpreting the rhetoric and the need to convey sarcasm and irony effectively.
Of course, some might argue that technology can render interpreters obsolete, with real-time transcription being the answer. However, for many, the richness and immediacy of ASL offer a more comprehensive understanding. It’s not just about conveying the words; it’s about conveying the whole meaning of what’s being said, in a way that resonates with those who depend on it.
So, in the end, it comes down to a matter of fairness and inclusion. The judge’s order is a step in the right direction, ensuring that deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans can engage with public discourse on an equal footing. It’s a reminder that true equality demands not just words, but also tangible action.