Ragbag Headliners

Defendants With Limited English Have Right To Interpreter

Defendants with limited English-language skills have a constitutional right to court interpreters in criminal trials, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled Monday.

The ruling came in a case involving a Mandarin Chinese speaker who was sentenced to 10 years in prison on two counts of cruelty to a child. Annie Ling, who had limited English language skills, did not understand that she had the option to plead guilty instead of going to trial and possibly facing a longer sentence, said the American Civil Liberties Union, one of two groups that filed a friend-of-the-court brief stating that denying a defendant an interpreter violates the U.S. Constitution and civil rights laws.

"The court acknowledged that we don't have two systems of justice in this country -- one for English speakers and another for everyone else," said Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the National Security/Immigrants' Rights Project at the ACLU of Georgia. "The constitutional guarantee of due process applies to everyone in this country, not just fluent English speakers." -Read more at CNN Justice 

<><><>*<><><>

Huck Finn Gets Some Changes

Acclaimed by critics, scholars, and -- of course -- readers, Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" is one of the great American novels. The book has been reprinted countless times, adapted into movies, and translated into just about every language under the sun. But should it be updated for today's times?
News that the manuscript would undergo some changes sent shockwaves through the Search box. According to Publishers Weekly, NewSouth Books plans to release a version of "Huck Finn" that cuts the "n" word and replaces it with "slave." The slur "injun," referring to Native Americans, will also be replaced.

It's important to note that in using the words, Twain was critiquing racism, not endorsing it. Also important: These changes affect just one version of the classic novel, and won't apply to all the printings. Regardless, public response has been swift. Almost immediately, Web searches on "huck finn censored" and "huckleberry finn changes" spiked into breakout status.

The reponse on Twitter has been equally thunderous. Many of the comments appear to be against the changes. One person sarcastically writes, "I love when people erase racism and pretend it never happened." Still, not everyone is outraged. One respondent writes that it is "awkward being the only black kid in class and having to read it." Another points out that the original is in the public domain and still available to anyone who wants to read it.

A popular column for Entertainment Weekly asks whether this is all such a bad thing. Is it so different, the column asks, from editing "The Godfather" so it can be shown on network television? With this new version of "Huck Finn," more people, including young readers, will be able to enjoy it. Does that make the changes worth it?

We don't know the answer, but it's a question worth thinking about. Either way, the novel will survive the controversy. "Huck Finn" was first published in 1884, and it was just a year later when people began to wonder if the book should be banned. The more things change. - Yahoo News