Overview
Title
To amend title 11, District of Columbia Official Code, to revise references in such title to individuals with intellectual disabilities.
ELI5 AI
S. 3698 is a bill that wants to change some old and not-so-nice words in the laws for Washington, D.C., about people with intellectual disabilities to make them nicer and more respectful. For example, instead of saying "substantially retarded persons," it says "persons with moderate intellectual disabilities."
Summary AI
S. 3698 is a bill that aims to update the language used in the District of Columbia Official Code to refer to individuals with intellectual disabilities. The bill proposes changes in specific sections of the code by replacing outdated terms like "substantially retarded persons" with "persons with moderate intellectual disabilities." This change affects the jurisdictional sections related to the United States District Court, the Superior Court, and the Family Court within the District's code.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, titled the "Words Matter for the District of Columbia Courts Act," seeks to amend certain sections of the District of Columbia Official Code. Specifically, it aims to replace outdated language concerning individuals with intellectual disabilities with more current and respectful terminology. This change is meant to modernize the language used in legal documents, reflecting a broader societal shift towards inclusivity and respect when referring to individuals with disabilities.
Significant Issues
One of the primary issues with the bill is the selection of terminology. While the bill updates the language from "substantially retarded persons" to "persons with moderate intellectual disabilities," there is a concern that this new phrase may not fully align with the most current and widely accepted terminology by disability advocates. This reflects ongoing challenges in legal reforms where language must not only be updated but should also sensitively reflect contemporary understanding and respect.
Another notable issue is the bill's lack of explicit discussion regarding potential legal, financial, or operational impacts of these updates. While linguistic changes might seem minor, they can have significant implications for how the District of Columbia court system operates and interprets these sections of the law. The absence of a detailed analysis or consideration of these impacts could lead to challenges in implementation.
Impact on the Public
The most immediate effect of the bill is the promotion of more respectful and accurate terminology, which could lead to greater public awareness and sensitivity regarding issues related to intellectual disabilities. By setting a precedent in legal texts, the bill potentially influences the normalization of such language in broader societal contexts.
However, because the bill does not address operational implications, there might be unforeseen administrative challenges or legal ambiguities that could arise. These challenges could affect how the public interacts with the legal system, potentially causing confusion if certain legal interpretations are not aligned with the updated language.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For individuals with intellectual disabilities and advocacy groups, the bill may be seen as a step forward in recognizing the importance of respectful language. It acknowledges their rights and dignity by modernizing legal descriptions. However, if the chosen terminology does not meet their standards of inclusivity, it might not fully satisfy these groups.
Legal professionals and the court system in the District of Columbia might be affected by the need to adapt to these changes. Legal practitioners may require additional guidance or training to understand and apply the updated terminology appropriately. Moreover, such changes might necessitate adjustments in existing legal documents and procedures, possibly leading to increased administrative efforts.
In summary, while the bill aims to modernize language to reflect current societal norms, it may require further refinements and considerations to fully meet the needs of those it affects. Addressing these concerns could enhance its acceptance and effectiveness across various sectors.
Issues
The language update to replace 'substantially retarded persons' with 'persons with moderate intellectual disabilities' aims to modernize terminology but may still fall short of fully capturing inclusive and respectful language preferred by disability advocates (Section 2).
While the bill focuses on linguistic changes, it does not address any potential legal, financial, or operational impacts that might arise from these updates. This omission may result in unforeseen consequences for the District of Columbia court system and associated activities (Sections 2a, 2b, and 2c).
The bill provides minimal information beyond language amendments, making the specific impacts or benefits unclear to those unfamiliar with the legal context. This lack of clarity may lead to public confusion or criticism regarding the intent and scope of the changes (Section 1).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill establishes its short title, which is the "Words Matter for the District of Columbia Courts Act".
2. References to individuals with intellectual disabilities Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section makes changes to the District of Columbia Official Code by replacing outdated terms that refer to individuals with intellectual disabilities with more respectful and accurate language, specifically updating phrases to "persons with moderate intellectual disabilities" in multiple legal sections.