News about the XXX Olympiad prompted us to question whether London’s numerical superiority in languages spoken (300+) over New York City (ca. 160) affected the decision of the International Olympic Committee. Yesterday mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer took sitting Mayor Michael Bloomberg to task for not meeting the needs of the city’s non-Anglophone population. Ferrer was sensitized to the language issue when, as a youth, he had to translate documents and interpret for his hospitalized Puerto Rican grandmother. He later authored legislation requiring interpreters in emergency rooms. On a side note, we’d like to question the New York Sun about its hackneyed “Lost in Translation” headline.

Ferrer hasn’t just picked an emotional hobby horse to ride — he’s looking to U.S. law. On 17 May 1954 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the Topeka, Kansas Board of Education, thus desegregating public schools and introducing the concept of equitable access to public resources. Ten years later the Civil Rights Act codified the often unrealized American premise that all men are created equal. Title VI of this landmark legislation barred federal agencies from acting in ways that have “the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program as respect individuals of a particular race, color or national origin.” The courts later extended this provision to language, ruling that lack of proficiency in English should be treated as a surrogate for race under equal protection statutes. Executive orders, agency guidelines, and legislation such as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act have also mandated translation and interpretation.

Such rulings and orders will force government agencies to provide more interpretation and translated documents, forms, and instructions for Americans with limited English proficiency (LEP). Furthermore, public and private firms providing services to the government or accepting federal funds will face the same requirements, thus creating market demand for translation and interpretation services. That is, unless shrinking government budgets or “English Firsters” — those who advocate making English the official national language of the U.S. — prevail.