Whether translated out-of-court testimonial statements may be admitted without violating the Confrontation Clause when an interpreter is deemed an agent of the defendant or a language conduit

QUESTION PRESENTED The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause provides that, “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const. Amend. VI. The question presented is: Whether translated out-of-court testimonial statements may be admitted by the Government as evidence against a defendant without providing the defendant with an opportunity to cross-examine the interpreter, and without violating the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution, simply because the interpreter is deemed by the trial judge to be either an agent of the defendant or to have acted as a language conduit. i