Trump Rejects ASL Access, Claims It’s a Threat to Control
The Trump administration is embroiled in a lawsuit concerning American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation services, which the Department of Justice claims would impede the President’s ability to control his public image. This follows a lawsuit filed by the National Association for the Deaf, arguing that halting ASL interpretation denies the deaf community access to essential information from the White House. The association highlights the ongoing struggle for meaningful communication access, particularly during significant national events.
Government attorneys assert that providing real-time ASL interpretation could disrupt Trump’s carefully crafted image and messaging. They suggested alternative forms of access, such as online transcripts and closed captioning, while questioning whether other government branches would face similar demands for such services. Critics note the lack of a compelling argument for why ASL interpretation might damage Trump’s image.
Despite having begun to provide some ASL interpretation, the White House has appealed a federal judge’s ruling that mandated real-time interpreting for Trump’s comments. The administration’s ongoing refusal to comply fully aligns with its broader trend of dismantling diversity and inclusion initiatives. This effort has been part of Trump’s agenda since returning to office, reflecting an administration characterized by its opposition to inclusivity efforts.
The Biden administration had previously utilized ASL interpretation regularly for press briefings and public communications. By contrast, Trump’s refusal has raised significant backlash from advocates for the deaf community, who argue that the right to access information is fundamental. The criticism highlights a troubling disregard for inclusivity that many see as indicative of Trump’s broader governance style.
In the context of broader cultural changes, Trump’s administration has made headlines for reversing various diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies. These actions extend beyond communication access and reflect a more general trend of retrenchment against modern inclusion standards across federal institutions.