Accommodating Linguistic Difference: Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Language Rights in the United States

In Henzdndez v. New York,\u27 the Supreme Court held that prosecutorsmay strike potential jurors from the venire on the basis of their ability tospeak a language other than English. Courts have consistently treated biandmultilingualism as reasonable grounds for excluding individualsfrom participation in an institution long considered to be a fundamentalsite of civic engagement. Courts seem to fear that bilingual jurors willdisrupt jury deliberations that are carefully cabined by legal procedures,which include court-sponsored translations of foreign-language testimony.The Henzdndez Court, despite its deference to the prosecutors,complicated the issue in its plurality opinion by highlighting the centralityof language to individual personality and the interpretation of meaning