In recent days, a rumor has circulated on social media in the United States stating: “Anyone caught speaking Spanish will be fined $5,000 or end up in jail.” This rumor has been widely circulated among Americans of Latin origin. Despite the lack of denial or any official statement regarding the rumor, some interpret its prevalence as a reflection of the polarization caused by the executive order signed by President Donald Trump on March 1, 2025, which designates English as the official language of the United States at the federal level for the first time in the country’s history since its founding. This step is the latest in a series of executive orders aimed at strengthening American national identity; previous measures included renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America in official government documents and renaming “Denali Mountain” – the highest mountain in North America – to “Mount McKinley.”
The decision to make English the official language has elicited varied responses both within and outside the United States, especially given the prevailing belief that English has always been America’s official language due to its widespread use in government discourse, educational and economic institutions, media, and the film industry. However, there are millions of citizens and residents in the United States for whom English is not their first language; approximately 350 languages are spoken in the United States and its territories, and 8% of the population demonstrates limited proficiency in speaking English, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
This analysis examines the controversy surrounding this decision, starting from previous attempts to adopt English as the official language, through the current decision and its implications, and the reactions between supporters and opponents. Finally, it explores the impact of this decision on Americans of Latin origin in particular, as they constitute the largest percentage of naturalized citizens.
Previous attempts:
The official language is the language used by the government and its agencies. According to the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, the existence of one or more official languages can define the characteristics of the nation and the cultural identity of its inhabitants.
Although all official documents in the United States are written in English, the Founding Fathers preferred not to declare an official language for the United States in order to preserve linguistic and racial diversity among the population, as well as the economic and social value of knowing different languages, in addition to their desire not to restrict the linguistic and cultural freedom of early citizens. Therefore, neither the Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution includes a provision specifying the official language of the country, which has contributed to the establishment of the United States as a nation open to different cultures and languages. Despite this, there has been a recurring trend for over a century regarding the necessity of adopting an official language, as follows:
The first steps to make English official: The stance of former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909) in support of English as the language of the United States served as a reference for proponents of this direction, even though he did not take any official action on the matter. After World War I, negative sentiments towards non-English languages, particularly German, intensified, leading to the criminalization and ridicule of speaking non-English languages in some states. In this context, Representative Washington J. McCormick proposed in 1923 replacing English with “American” as a national language, marking the first time the U.S. Congress discussed the issue of adopting an “official language.”
However, the most famous action was when Senator S.I. Hayakawa introduced a constitutional amendment in 1981 aimed at declaring English as the official language and prohibiting laws and orders that require the use of other languages. Although this amendment was rejected, it served as a starting point for many initiatives related to the “Official English” or “English Only” movement.
Establishment of institutions to support official English: Supporters of American English were keen on forming alliances to promote the idea of adopting it as the official language, especially before the courts and public opinion, in addition to seeking to convince legislators to adopt it at all levels of government. They believed that adopting English as a common and unifying language would support the cohesion of American society and enhance its cultural identity. In this context, the group “U.S. ENGLISH” was established in 1983 with the aim of preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States, as well as the organization (ProEnglish), which was founded in 1994 to defend the use of official English in various institutions.
Legislative proposals in the twenty-first century: Recent years have seen several attempts to declare English as the official language in the United States. In 2019, Representative Steve King and others introduced a bill aimed at unifying government procedures in English. In 2021, Representative Louie Gohmert and Senator Jim Inhofe proposed a measure recognizing English as the basic language for citizenship. Initiatives continued with the “English Language Unity Act” proposed by Senators J.D. Vance (current Vice President) and Kevin Cramer in 2023, followed by Senator Bernie Moreno in 2025. These legislative proposals are usually introduced by Republican representatives.
States adopting official English: More than thirty states have responded to these calls and enacted laws declaring English as the official language before the issuance of the current executive order, with California, Florida, and Georgia being the most prominent. In the same context, some states and territories have adopted other languages officially alongside English, such as Hawaiian in Hawaii, Spanish in Puerto Rico, and the Sioux language in South Dakota, while Alaska has more than 20 recognized languages.
Trump’s new decision:
During President Donald Trump’s election campaign, he repeatedly used anti-linguistic diversity rhetoric in the context of his attacks on increasing numbers of immigrants. For example, Trump mentioned in a speech at a campaign rally in Virginia in March 2024 that classrooms in New York are “packed with students from foreign countries, from countries that don’t even know what their language is.” Trump repeated these statements multiple times during his campaign, saying, “Immigrants are coming into the country speaking truly foreign languages.”
Therefore, it was not surprising that the President issued an executive order on March 1, 2025, designating English as the official language of the United States. The order stated that its purpose is to enhance national unity, shared values, and the integration of citizens into the economy and social life, in addition to establishing a unified American culture for all members of society. The executive order also included the repeal of a previous order issued in 2000, which mandated agencies and other beneficiaries of federal funding to provide language assistance to non-English speakers. It is worth noting that the new decision does not require government agencies to make immediate changes or remove existing documents in other languages but leaves it to the heads of these agencies to take appropriate measures to ensure the efficient delivery of government services.
There is no doubt that this decision is a victory for the “Official English” movement in the context of efforts to curb immigration and bilingual education to enhance national unity. The group (U.S. ENGLISH) considered the decision a step “in the right direction,” as it “establishes a common path for communication and encourages more people from different backgrounds or immigrants to learn English better in order to access public services.”
In this context, Trump believes that new American citizens learning English is a beautiful response to the country’s welcome. Senator Eric Schmitt, a Republican from Missouri, described the decision as a “long overdue formal recognition; as we in this country speak English.” Others believed that the decision might encourage new immigrants to learn English and not rely on translators, thus integrating into society and accessing better opportunities.
Widespread criticism:
Despite the decision being supported by a large number of Americans, particularly Republican supporters, it faced widespread criticism from immigrant rights groups, linguistic organizations, and others. These groups pointed out several negative effects of the decision, such as restricting immigrant integration, potential obstacles to government services, and other consequences, as follows:
• Questioning the decision’s effectiveness: Before the decision, there was no legal provision specifying the official language of the United States at the federal level; in other words, it was not officially recognized by law (de jure). However, English remained the official language in practice (de facto), as approximately 275 million Americans use it in their daily interactions, even if it is not their first language, and it is the language of the economy, media, and the American film industry. Therefore, American journalist of Peruvian descent Carlos Lozada questioned, “Why burden ourselves with proposing a law that recognizes an existing reality?” He added that “market demands require immigrants to learn the language, more clearly than the government can do. Mastering English is essential for integrating into the American economy, obtaining better jobs, and improving the standard of living.”
• Affected groups: It is believed that immigrants and multilingual families are the most affected, as they will face difficulties in understanding government documents and procedures. In this context, Anabel Mendoza, the communications director at the non-profit organization (United We Dream), which advocates for immigrants, believes that this decision will hinder immigrant integration effectively. The Asian American Congressional Caucus described the decision as a “covert attempt to allow federal agencies to discriminate against immigrants.” In addition to immigrants, groups of citizens belonging to indigenous populations and minorities that maintain their native languages will also be affected; these individuals may face additional challenges due to their limited proficiency in English, whether due to low education levels, difficulty in acquiring it, or their strong attachment to their cultural and linguistic identity.
• Concerns about erosion of political rights: It is assumed that American law regulates the participation of linguistic minorities in elections through the “bilingual elections” legislation. However, some fear that declaring English as the official language may reduce this participation. For example, the organization (APIAVote), which specializes in registering Asian American voters, expressed concern about Trump’s decision, believing that it may create a barrier for millions of voters, especially naturalized citizens who do not speak English fluently: “It will make it difficult for them to engage in civic activities and vote, in addition to accessing healthcare, economic resources, and basic education.”
• Restriction of access to government services: Despite the decision not mandating federal agencies to use only English in communicating with citizens, withdrawing the budgets allocated for language services may serve as an excuse for these agencies not to provide assistance to citizens. In this context, American researcher Austin Kocher expects the gradual disappearance of existing non-English documents and a decline in the production of new documents in other languages within the federal government. He added that “this decision will make it difficult for immigrants to access legal resources when detained or subject to deportation proceedings in court or otherwise.”
• Decline in the image of the United States as a diverse society: Cary Coglianese, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, believes that “declaring one language as the official language is a radical and symbolic change in the meaning of America,” which has always been known as a highly diverse society that embraces different cultures. Therefore, critics of the decision believe that “national unity” as a central goal will not come through forced integration but through accepting difference and diversity.
Concerns of Latinos:
The number of people of Latin origin in the United States exceeds 60 million, constituting approximately 18.9% of the total population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, as a result of increased immigration from Mexico, Central America, and other Latin American countries, in addition to bilingual education programs and bilingual advertising campaigns that usually target Spanish speakers. Therefore, Spanish is the most common language in American households after English, especially in states like California and Texas; hence, it is expected that these individuals will be among the most affected by the decision.
• Allegations of targeting Spanish: Some believe that the official language decision specifically targets Spanish, especially after the swift removal of the Spanish version from the official White House website a month after Trump took office. In this context, Luis Garcia Montero, the director of the Cervantes Institute (a Spanish government organization that advocates for the use and learning of the language), expressed his regret over the change in the U.S. government’s stance towards Spanish after Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House, describing the absence of the Spanish version from the White House website as “unfortunate news.”
• Bilingual generation: Many Latinos, especially from the second and third generations, are keen on learning English to improve their social and economic opportunities, even though Spanish remains an important part of their cultural identity. As a result, many younger Latinos are bilingual, which sometimes exposes them to bullying from other Latinos, especially if they cannot speak Spanish, according to the Pew Research Center.
• Marginalization concerns: Some Americans of Latin origin have expressed concerns about marginalization and reduced opportunities to access basic services. While many Spanish speakers are bilingual, a significant percentage of them do not speak English at all. For example, approximately 12% of Texas residents use Spanish in their homes, while their proficiency in English is less than “very good.” An analysis conducted by the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce indicated that the decision will make it difficult for individuals with limited English proficiency to access job opportunities, in addition to exacerbating labor shortages in sectors such as construction and agriculture, especially since “the Latino community plays a vital role in the country’s economy,” according to Representative Adriano Espaillat, a Democrat. The Hispanic Council, a research center specializing in the Hispanic presence in the United States, affirmed that Trump’s decision will not slow down the development of Spanish or stop its use in the country.
Finally, Spanish occupies an important part of the American cultural and linguistic landscape, but it does not match English as the primary language of politics, the economy, and the arts in the United States.
Although Trump and supporters of the decision aim to enhance national cohesion and support the cohesion of American society and culture, the decision has led to polarization within American society between supporters of English American identity on one hand, and advocates of the United States as a country characterized by extreme diversity on the other hand.
Even if the official decision does not directly affect American social and individual life, it may have consequences in the future. In this context, it is expected that this decision will be a point of contention for presidential candidates in the upcoming 2028 elections, with the possibility of presenting successful international models that have managed to adopt more than one official language, such as Canada and Belgium.
Therefore, there are calls for adopting policies and statements that reassure linguistic and cultural minorities in American society about the risks of marginalization, along with providing means of protection for individuals who face discrimination due to linguistic reasons. In addition, there should be cooperation with the private sector to provide technologies and digital solutions (regarding learning English and instant translation) to support non-English speakers, especially the elderly and those who face learning difficulties, to communicate with government entities, healthcare providers, legal services, and others.
