South Dakota courts aim to improve language access as diversity, interpreter needs grow

Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight

Interpreter use in South Dakota courtrooms has more than doubled in the last decade, according to the Unified Judicial System.

Requests for translation services, which cost the state more than $26,000 a year in 2022 and 2023, increased from 1,566 in 2013 to 3,570 in 2023

UJS expects further growth in requests as South Dakota becomes more diverse. More than 17,500 South Dakotans speak English less than “very well,” according to a UJS report.

The court system started working to improve language access in the courts over a decade ago. Historically, the state has approached language access “ad hoc,” said Greg Sattizahn, the state court administrator.

The state has taken a more strategic approach to language access since then, Sattizahn said, including implementing a statewide language access plan in 2021.

“We wanted to make sure we develop the capacity to meet the demands and expectations — and understood how to work with interpreters,” Sattizahn said. “This is an area we have to continue to grow in and be responsive to with the demands we’re seeing. It’s not static.”

Both Sattizahn and critics of the courts’ current language access system say the courts have a long way to go, especially in recruiting quality interpreters and ensuring accurate interpreting.

South Dakota lacks training for interpreters

Interpreters are professionals contracted out by UJS to interpret a person’s testimony or case verbatim if the person or judge determines they do not speak English well enough.

Of the more than 3,500 instances of interpreter use in 2023, according to UJS, 51% were Spanish, followed by 9% Arabic, 6% Swahili and 6% Dinka (spoken by the Dinka people, an ethnic group native to South Sudan in northeast Africa).

South Dakota has nearly 80 interpreters, according to UJS, but circuit courts frequently reach out to interpreters in other states or through remote services. Of the statewide roster, 25 are Spanish interpreters, four are Arabic, one is Swahili and none are Dinka.

South Dakota doesn’t provide support or training for interpreters, said Sandra Guzman, a Spanish legal interpreter and translator based in Sioux Falls.

“In South Dakota, there is nothing provided for people to educate themselves in the field for court interpreting,” said Guzman, who is an immigrant from Chile.

That makes it difficult for potential interpreters to learn about the profession, she said, and contributes to South Dakota’s dearth of legal interpreters.

Minnesota’s legal system offers a course for interpreters. In it, interpreters are evaluated on their English skills and their interpreted language, led through interpreter ethics, and taught how to interpret in a legal context — including participating in a mock trial.

Guzman, who has interpreted in South Dakota since 1995, took the Minnesota classes in 2007 and 2008. She also attended an intensive legal interpreter program in Arizona in 2009. She’s been a self-employed, full-time legal interpreter and translator since 2022.

“It was like a preparation course,” Guzman said.

Minnesota courts ranked highest in the country for language access, according to the National Center for Access to Justice. South Dakota, based on a 2021 assessment, ranked last.

States like Minnesota are “more advanced” than South Dakota, Sattizahn said.

“That’s definitely somewhere we need to get to and try to build that into our process and make it more inviting for interpreters,” he said, adding that UJS’s language access coordinator has reviewed materials from surrounding states.

The first step, is recruiting more qualified interpreters, Sattizahn said.

“It’s very informal here. We kind of rely on interpreting agencies to provide training,” Sattizahn said. “A training like that would help us and is something that’ll be on a future list of to-do items here.”

The hope is to “build our foundation” through recruitment and informational sessions, Sattizahn said. Those sessions won’t train potential interpreters — which Guzman said would have the biggest impact — but focus on the information needed to succeed in the role: the process of the court, common terminology, types of cases, and engaging with documents they’d need to be familiar with.

Sattizahn aims to get such a training up and running by 2026.

“In my mind, 18 months seems realistic,” Sattizahn said. “We’re really trying to explain how to work with us. Other states have developed those robust programs, which we should be able to borrow from.”

State lacks interpreter qualification evaluation, test

South Dakota is lacking in recruitment, Guzman said, but also lacks a way to ensure interpreter quality.

Competent court interpreters are “able to completely and accurately interpret everything said in court,” the state’s language access plan says, “without adding or omitting words or summarizing statements.”

“You need to have knowledge of the field you’re interpreting for. You can’t just be bilingual — even Americans don’t understand what they’re being told in the court system,” Guzman said. “They need to be trained, and they need to have a passion for what they do. They can’t just be anybody off the street.”

South Dakota relies on interpreter expertise and qualifications built around personal or educational experience, Sattizahn said. After that, it’s up to the judge, attorneys and others in the courtroom to make sure the interpreter is doing their job adequately.

If it looks like the interpreter is summarizing or not providing information when the person is talking, for example, “there are cues, and you can rely on other people in the court,” Sattizahn said.

South Dakota joined the Consortium for Language Access in the Courts in 2022. Membership allows access to tests to establish qualified interpreters and to share interpreter-related resources and databases with other member states.

South Dakota is not using the test materials, however, and UJS doesn’t plan to develop an independent testing program, Sattizahn said.

Guzman said she’s seen a judge throw out an interpreter because he was caught interpreting inaccurately. The client’s case was rescheduled and delayed as a result.

Guzman herself has been assigned cases as an interpreter for clients who aren’t truly Spanish speakers, including for people originally from Guatemala. While Spanish is a commonly spoken language in Guatemala, it has a different dialect and can be spoken in combination with native Mayan languages.

“Their words and the way they phrase things are kind of broken. I’ll tell the attorney and they’ll verify they speak a specific dialect and have to get a new interpreter,” Guzman said. “I don’t want to fool anybody or waste their time or my time.”

Taneeza Islam is CEO for South Dakota Voices for Peace and South Dakota Voices for Justice. She’s seen similar incidents. Islam represented a client who requested an interpreter during her civil case. The client, who interpreted professionally, stopped her interpreter during the case and informed the judge she was not being accurately interpreted, Islam recalled.

Islam said interpreter problems can create real problems for non-English speakers in the justice system, and not just in criminal cases.

“These are really high stakes issues,” Islam said. “Oftentimes we think of access to justice on the criminal side, but civil cases are important too: protection orders against abusers, evictions, custody. If I can’t communicate with an attorney or explain what’s happening to a judge, how are they going to actually make a decision? Usually the party that knows English has a greater advantage in convincing a judge or explaining their side of the story.”

Using technology to supplement dearth of in-person interpreters

In-person interpreters are ideal for most situations, but it’s unlikely that UJS will be able to fill the state’s translation needs entirely with in-person, local interpreters. Several other states across the country also struggle to recruit qualified interpreters, Sattizahn said.

He sees technology as a solution, citing remote interpreters.

About 93% of interpreter requests in 2023 came from the Second Circuit Court, which is located in Sioux Falls and includes Minnehaha and Lincoln counties. The remainder of South Dakota courts need interpreters less frequently, though the need is growing in communities such as Huron or Flandreau, where there are growing communities of non-English speakers.

UJS recently kicked off a pilot program in Minnehaha, Brookings, Aurora, Yankton and Beadle counties to make it easier for non-English speakers to navigate language barriers outside of the courtroom. In addition to the video interpreter, the software program under testing offers live AI-written interpreter and translation services.

The hope is to find a balance between remote and in-person interpreters, Sattizahn said.

“We can minimize and use the technology to address the things that an interpreter might view as a waste of time, like if they had to drive an hour for a short hearing,” Sattizahn said. “Shorter proceedings where you’re just checking in fit better with remote. Cases of evidence or testimony of witnesses is important to have a live interpreter.”

Guzman has traveled to nearly every county courthouse in southeastern South Dakota at least once to interpret for Spanish speakers. She’s interpreted several times in Brookings, Mitchell and Parker.

Finding a balance between remote and in-person interpreters “makes sense,” Guzman said, but she’s still cautious of remote interpreting. The process can be awkward and is best reserved for “in case of emergency,” she said.

Guzman is glad South Dakota plans to implement a training program for potential interpreters, and hopes she can be involved.

“People need to be trained,” Guzman said. “Something has to start soon. We’re growing too fast.”