Author Date

2026-07-29

Degree Name

Department

Spanish and Portuguese

College

Humanities

Defense Date

2026-07-29

Publication Date

2026-08-14

First Faculty Advisor

Dr. Will Carr

First Faculty Reader

Dr. Daryl R. Hague

Second Faculty Reader

Brigitte Morales

Honors Coordinator

Dr. Gregory Stallings

Keywords

Translation Studies, Translation, Interpretation, Language Access, Limited English Proficiency, Title VI

Abstract

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act provides the primary statutory basis for the development of policies supporting language access. Rather than explicitly requiring institutions to accommodate individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP), the statute establishes a broad prohibition against discrimination based on race, color, and national origin. This thesis examines the process through which that broad statutory mandate has been interpreted and applied to specific language-access policies.

To elucidate the application of language access polices at the federal level, this analysis focuses on three landmark Supreme Court decisions concerning Title VI: Lau v. Nichols, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, and Alexander v. Sandoval. The decisions in these cases are placed alongside models developed within translation studies. The resulting legal and academic interdisciplinary comparison highlights the oft-competing roles of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches in defining language access requirements with the roles of the individuals directly responsible for their implementation. It suggests that by understanding these conflicting roles, the need becomes clear for greater involvement of linguistic experts, additional application of academic interpretive models, and the implementation of mechanisms for evaluation and accountability.