Sections

Linguistic diversity

Court must strike English-only amendment

The case stems from an Arizona state constitutional amendment narrowly passed in 1988 that required English to be the official -- and only -- language of ballots, public schools and all government functions and actions. Maria-Kelley Yniquez, a bilingual state employee who speaks English and Spanish while evaluating medical malpractice claims, sued the state.

She claims the amendment violates her right to free speech, as guaranteed by the First Amendment. While 22 states have English-only laws, only Arizona assesses penalties and fines to those who violate the amendment. The language was so vague that Jamie Gutierrez, a Hispanic state senator, noted that under the law he could have been prosecuted for speaking Spanish to his constituents.

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Appeals Court wisely struck down the amendment; the justices said the amendment restricted the constitutional rights of both state employees and the people they serve. In the majority opinion, Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote, "Language is by definition speech, and the regulation of any language is the regulation of speech."

Supporters of the legislation argue that English language is the glue that holds us all together, and that the United States needs one language to promote unity. However, these supporters overlook that the United States has existed for 219 years without an official language. As a nation of immigrants, the United States has seen waves of immigrants who know little, if any, English upon arrival. The United States has not disintegrated, but has been enriched by allowing immigrants to feel as comfortable as possible.

Proponents of English-only laws have yet to produce a solid reason why such laws are needed. Many claim that by speaking another language, people are forcing themselves into a lower class of society. However, all minorities, whether they be Spanish-speaking Hispanics or English-speaking African Americans, are already forced into lower classes than whites. Claims that language determines social standing have yet to be proved.

Currently, the United States is undergoing rapid cultural change. The 1990 census found that 32 million people over the age of 5 -- 14 percent of U.S. residents -- speak a foreign language in their home, an 11 percent jump since 1980. English-only laws force an increasing number of Americans to live in a place that makes it difficult for them to communicate.

Whenever institutions pass laws to limit free expression of language, they are effectively ripping into First Amendment rights. But beyond the theoretical argument, such laws are impractical. English-only legislation proves that many in this country would rather see non-English speakers change, rather than trying to embrace cultural differences and allow for various forms of communication. Now it is up to the Supreme Court to make a statement that ends the injustice of English-only legislation.