“Happy Judge, Happy Life”…

By: Ruth Garcia

Not always right.

As court interpreters, we work in spaces where everyone is trying to keep the wheels of justice moving.

But speed and convenience can never come before ethics.

Recently, an incident occurred in a courtroom where I have worked frequently for over a decade. It raised ethical and procedural concerns that placed the assigned interpreters in an inappropriate and uncomfortable position.

A colleague and I were assigned to a family matter involving one English-speaking party and one monolingual Spanish-speaking party. Before the proceeding, the Court directed the bailiff to take the parties and interpreters into a side room so paperwork could be completed and interpreted outside the courtroom and off the record.

We advised that, pursuant to our ethical obligations, we were uncomfortable being left alone with the parties during substantive discussions involving legal paperwork and possible waivers of rights, especially in the absence of an officer of the court. We asked that the bailiff remain in the room.

Once in the side room, significant back-and-forth discussions began. The Spanish-speaking party made several statements expressing confusion and concern regarding the documents they were being asked to sign, including that they did not know what was in the paperwork, had been told they could not change anything, and understood they were waiving their right to ask for anything.

At that point, I told my colleague I did not believe it was ethically appropriate for us to continue without court intervention.

Court interpreters are not authorized to provide legal explanations or legal advice, nor are they authorized to facilitate substantive off-the-record legal discussions or negotiations between parties.

We returned to the courtroom area and requested that our concerns be addressed and placed on the record: interpreters should not be left alone with parties during substantive legal discussions or the execution of legal documents, and the situation raised ethical concerns about our role and boundaries.

A court services supervisor was called. However, despite our concerns, the Court stated that this was the first time the judge had heard interpreters object to interpreting paperwork under those circumstances, said there was no time to address the issue, declined to place it on the record, and continued the case to another day.

This was not about refusing to interpret.

It was about refusing to be placed outside the scope of our role.

We are not legal explainers.

We are not facilitators of agreements.

We are not witnesses to off-the-record negotiations.

We are not there to make improper procedures look proper simply because interpretation is needed.

Our role is essential precisely because it has boundaries.

And those boundaries matter even when they cause discomfort, when no one else in the room seems concerned, when the judge wants the case to keep moving, or when another interpreter may have done it differently.

Ethics are not situational.

A code of ethics is not something we follow only when it is convenient, easy, or well-received.

Sometimes, the most professional thing we can do is respectfully stop, speak up, and protect the integrity of the process.

Because “happy judge, happy life” should never mean “silent interpreter, compromised ethics.”

Keep the Conversation Going

If this topic resonated with you, be sure to check out our previous blog posts for more insights on the realities of our profession, and the evolving world of judiciary translation and interpreting:

Do Not Judge Lest You Be Judged — What can we do to make sure practitioners have access to the needed information to establish fees that work for them?

The 99% Show Rate: How Process and Relationships Solve the No-Show Problem

What processes and relationships can help agencies and interpreters prevent no-shows?   

Confidential vs Privileged: Is There A Difference? — When can an interpreter be required to disclose confidential or privileged information?

What’s Going On in Our Field? | Fall 2026 — As AI, workforce shortages, and remote interpreting reshape our field, what should language access professionals be watching out for next?

You can find these and more in our blog archives!

Interested in sharing your insights with our community? 

Check out Writing for The NAJIT Observer to learn how you can contribute.

Disclaimer:

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position, policies, or views of the NAJIT Board of Directors or the organization as a whole. Content published in The NAJIT Observer is intended to encourage professional dialogue, reflection, and community engagement. Reader discretion is advised where topics may involve complex ethical, professional, or emotionally sensitive subject matter.

A Note About Comments

We want it to be easy for our community to join the conversation. At this time, comments may appear across multiple NTO posts rather than being specific to the post you are currently reading.

We are actively working on a solution that will give each post its own discussion section and make it easier for our community to participate. 

Thank you for your patience as we improve the commenting experience.