This move, however, comes even though nearly one-in-five US citizens, around 68 million people, speak a language other than English at home.
Prior to this order, the United States was among a small group of nations, including Mexico, the UK, Australia and Eritrea that had no legally mandated national language policy.
While the executive order argues that such a policy will "create a more cohesive and efficient society," linguists and language rights advocates have raised strong opposition.
An international team of scholars including Dr Saul Albert, of Loughborough University, Dr Chase Raymond from the University of Colorado Boulder and Dr Elliott Hoey of VU Amsterdam, have warned that Trump's executive order could escalate language-based discrimination in the United States.
In a new paper, Language policy as interactional practice in everyday public space: The Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction, led by Dr Raymond and published in Language, the flagship journal of the Linguistic Society of America, they introduce a new open access corpus of transcribed video data showing moments where people are challenged for speaking a language other than English in public spaces.
The short encounters capture interactions between members of the public, (often published first on social media or in local news outlets) shot in stores, restaurants, or public parks in which people are challenged for not speaking English. For example, in the clip above, we see an a viral video of an incident of language discrimination in El Paso, Texas.
Such encounters often start with challenges such as “why can’t you speak English” justified by mentions of being in America or, as in this case the challenger claiming to be a “bona fide American’” However here, and in many similar cases, we also see the target arguing back that “In this country I can speak whatever language I want”, even explicitly citing that “here in America we do not have an official language”.
The new paper aims to show how language policies and ideologies play out in everyday life, and how such policies impact social interactions and fuel political debates over language use.
“Language discrimination is not just a matter of official policy, but is actively enforced in everyday interactions, often reflecting racial and national identity conflicts,” said the researchers.
"President Trump's 2025 executive order declaring English the official language of the United States marks a significant shift in national language policy, reinforcing the idea that speaking English is central to American identity.
“While the U.S. has long had no legally mandated national language, this move legitimizes linguistic discrimination, fuelling the policing of non-English speakers in public spaces.
“The Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction (CLDI) has already documented years of encounters where individuals are told to 'speak English' or are confronted with phrases like 'this is America.'
“With this new policy, such interactions are likely to become more frequent and emboldened, as language policing gains implicit governmental backing.”
Other reactions to Trump’s pivot towards English include the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) who swiftly responded with a statement titled, Four Reasons Why English Should Not Be the Official Language of the United States, challenging the ideological and practical implications of the order.
This forthcoming study in Language provides a critical perspective on the issue, and argues that national language status extends far beyond official policy, influencing racialized conflicts over language use in everyday life.
The Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction (CLDI)
One of the key resources tracking these real-world effects is the Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction (CLDI), an open-access archive documenting incidents where individuals are confronted for speaking languages other than English in public.
The CLDI compiles video data – often originally posted on social media or local news sites – capturing instances in which people in public spaces such as stores, restaurants, and parks are told to “speak English.”
A recurring theme in these confrontations is the phrase “this is America”, used by both those challenging and defending multilingualism.
On one side, it is invoked to insist that English should be spoken; on the other, it is used to assert the right to linguistic freedom.
Notably, in some cases, individuals facing linguistic discrimination have explicitly cited the U.S.’s former lack of an official language as justification for speaking a language other than English in public.
The CLDI, which has documented language discrimination cases since 2015, continues to track new incidents and provide critical insight into how Trump’s executive order may further shape language-based conflicts in public life.
As language choice increasingly becomes a flashpoint in political and social debates, the CLDI offers valuable evidence on the lived impact of official language policies.
ENDS