On March 1, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order formally designates English as the official language of the United States. This historic decision marks the first time the federal government has designated an official language, reshaping the way government agencies interact with non-English speakers.
Under this new mandate, federal agencies are not required to adjust or remove existing services, but they now have the option to forgo providing translator services and multilingual documentation for those who do not speak English. This revocation of support may create significant barriers for millions of Americans who rely on these services, centering on the question of inclusion versus exclusion.
Trump’s move reverses Executive Order 13166, which was signed by former President Bill Clinton on August 11, 2000. Clinton’s order aimed to improve access to federal programs for people with limited English proficiency, emphasizing the necessity for linguistically inclusive governance. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, as of 2022, approximately 1 in 10 people living in the U.S. speak a language other than English, with around 350 to 430 languages spoken nationwide.
Throughout his campaign and subsequent presidency, Trump has advocated for the designation of English as the official language as part of his larger agenda to promote national unity. He argued this would allow citizens to freely exchange ideas within one shared language. Amalia Llombart, an English and Modern Languages professor at Cal Poly Pomona, countered this perspective, stating, "This is saying something about the immigrants. It is diminishing the cultural capital of all the other countries. This isn’t just a cultural capital of humanity but also the United States. Why not embrace it as a good thing of this country?" Her remarks highlight the potential alienation of immigrant communities amid such sweeping language policies.
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) condemned Trump's executive order, condemning it for going against what they identify as foundational principles of the nation. LULAC’s national president Roman Palomares stated the order marginalizes millions of Americans who have significantly contributed to the nation’s cultural and economic strength. He noted, "The Founding Fathers enshrined freedom of speech in the First Amendment without limiting it to one language." Such sentiments reflect the growing concern over how this order might impact the socio-cultural fabric of the U.S.
Claudia Salazar Jimenez, another professor specializing in English and Modern Languages, stated her belief this new approach is fundamentally racist, limiting people's ability to express themselves. “When we talk about freedom of speech, it’s not just the speech itself but also the expression of the culture one person brings,” she said. “I think it is an attack on the First Amendment.” These criticisms reveal broader apprehensions about the erosion of multilingualism and cultural expression under the new order.
The order impacts not only cultural interactions but also everyday life for many individuals and families. Jose Ramirez, a computer information systems student, recounted his own experience as the primary translator for his Spanish-speaking mother. “We spoke Spanish because that's what everyone speaks at home, and I would be the one translating for her and filling out paperwork,” he explained. Ramirez’s story is emblematic of the challenges faced by first-generation students who often navigate dual languages for their families and themselves.
According to U.S. Census data, approximately 43 million individuals living in the United States identify Spanish as their primary language. These figures point to the significant portion of the population at risk of disenfranchisement under the new policy, as many people depend on resources available to them in their preferred language.
On the flip side, proponents of the executive order argue it fosters communication and unity among citizens, positing the significance of employing one official language to facilitate governmental and civic engagement. Trump supporters maintain this management of language reflects the values of American identity. They point to examples from other countries where official language designations are commonplace, arguing it may improve national cohesion.
Yet, detractors question the balance between national identity and the rich multiculturalism woven through American history. Critics fear this could lead to more division instead of unification, reinforcing the notion of cultural superiority among speakers of English. It raises the question: does this executive order promote meaningful dialogue, or does it stifle the very voices it claims to protect?
With the White House already removing its Spanish-language websites and resources shortly after Trump’s inauguration, and eliminating its Spanish-language account on X, many see this new development as part of broader patterns of diminishing support for linguistic diversity.
Looking forward, the societal ramifications of this executive decision remain to be fully understood. With federal agencies no longer required to accommodate non-English speakers, access to services – from healthcare to legal assistance – could deteriorate for numerous communities, particularly those already vulnerable due to language barriers. The future of America's multilingual heritage now hangs precariously as the nation grapples with what it means to communicate inclusively.
Trump's executive order undoubtedly sets the stage for continued debate on the role of language in shaping American identity, leaving many questioning the inclusion and exclusion dictated by the languages we speak.
