Politics
Trump Made English the Official Language. What Does It Mean for the Country?
President Trump’s executive order making English the official language of the United States reached into history to argue its case, noting that the country’s founding documents were written in English.
But it turns out, not only in English. After the Constitution was drafted in 1787, supporters of ratification printed translations for Dutch speakers in New York and German speakers in Pennsylvania, so they could understand the arguments for a “vollkommenere Vereinigung” — a more perfect union.
The push and pull over whether America should have one national language or embrace its polyglot spirit has generated fierce debate for more than a century, raising deeper questions about belonging and assimilation in a country whose people speak more than 350 languages.
Now, Mr. Trump’s executive order puts an “America first” stamp onto the nation’s speech.
His order gave a long-sought victory to the English-only movement, which has ties to efforts to curb immigration and bilingual education. Supporters said it recognized the reality of English’s primacy in American life. Nearly 80 percent of the population speaks only English, and immigrants have long been required to demonstrate English proficiency before becoming citizens.
Senator Eric Schmitt, Republican of Missouri, called it a “long, long overdue” official acknowledgment that “in this country, we speak English.” Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, wrote a social-media post in Spanish saying that English should be the country’s “idioma oficial.”
But immigrant-rights groups and congressional Democrats warned that the order could alienate immigrants and make it harder for non-English speakers to get government services, fill out health care forms or vote. The Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus called it a “thinly veiled attempt to allow federal agencies to discriminate against immigrants.”
Some critics compared Mr. Trump’s order to Indian boarding schools that forbade Native languages, World War I laws that banned the German language and state-level efforts to outlaw bilingual education.
Legal experts said the order’s effects might be muted at first.
It rescinds a mandate signed by then President Bill Clinton in 2000 that required government agencies and anyone who received federal money to provide translated documents and other language services to people who speak limited English.
But unlike some restrictive English-only state laws that have been struck down by courts, Mr. Trump’s order does not require agencies to operate solely in English. They can continue to offer documents and services in other languages.
“It’s not nearly as punitive as it could be,” said Mary Carol Combs, an education professor at the University of Arizona.
Early American history is full of examples of bilingual government, experts said. In the 19th century, Midwestern states translated laws and messages from their governors into Norwegian, German and Welsh. California’s 1849 Constitution required laws and decrees to be published in both English and Spanish.
“There have always been diverse linguistic populations,” said Christina Mulligan, a professor at Brooklyn Law School who wrote about the translated Constitutions.
An influx of immigrants from Asia and Latin America in the second half of the 20th century helped galvanize the modern English-only movement. More than 30 states have designated English as their official language, including heavily Democratic California.
Mr. Trump seized on the issue as one of American identity when he first ran for president. He told Jeb Bush, the bilingual former governor of Florida, “This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish.” During his campaign last year, Mr. Trump said American classrooms were being overwhelmed by students “from countries where they don’t even know what the language is.”
His executive order said that designating English as the official language would streamline communication, “reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society.”
The order got a mixed reaction from some voters in Arizona, a state with a large Mexican American electorate that went for Mr. Trump in 2016, flipped to Democrats four years later, and swung back to Mr. Trump in 2024. The state is also a battlefield over language in classrooms, where the Republican state school superintendent unsuccessfully sued several schools over their dual-language programs.
David Ramos, 36, who works in the aerospace industry in the Phoenix area, said he had thought that English was already the country’s official language. He grew up hearing his Puerto Rican father speak Spanish, and said he regretted never having learned it.
Mr. Ramos, who voted for Mr. Trump, said the designation would have little effect on his life, but he took it as a sign that Mr. Trump was bulldozing ahead to fulfill campaign promises.
“I would rather have a leader who’s assertive and spoke up for us, even if I didn’t agree with it 100 percent of the time, versus somebody who’s a doormat,” he said.
But Jorge Marquez, 39, was torn. He spent years working in construction, saving up to open English 4 U, a storefront school in Phoenix where he teaches immigrants about irregular English verbs and how to order a McDonald’s cheeseburger. Like Mr. Trump, he wants more people to speak English.
As a Friday evening class wrapped up, though, he and his students were worried. They saw learning English as a bridge to better jobs and being able to communicate with doctors, bosses and their children’s teachers. But they worried that Mr. Trump’s edict would stigmatize people who spoke other languages, had accents or were still struggling to learn English.
“He’s not wrong,” Mr. Marquez said of Mr. Trump. “English is beautiful, but teach it in a good way. Have a little empathy.”
Politics
Video: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
new video loaded: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
transcript
transcript
President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
Marijuana was downgraded from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug on Thursday. The reclassification does not legalize cannabis, but it does ease restrictions on the substance and allows for more research.
-
Today, I’m pleased to announce that I will be signing an executive order to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance with legitimate medical uses. We have people begging for me to do this. I want to emphasize that the order I am about to sign is not the legalization or it doesn’t legalize marijuana in any way, shape, or form, and in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug — has nothing to do with that.
December 18, 2025
Politics
Trump quietly signs sweeping $901B defense bill after bipartisan Senate passage
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Trump signed into law a nearly $1 trillion defense policy bill Thursday and approved what looks to be the largest military spending package in U.S. history.
The fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act authorizes $901 billion in military spending, roughly $8 billion more than the administration requested, according to Reuters.
It also delivers a nearly 4 percent pay raise for troops, provides new funding for Ukraine and the Baltic States, and includes measures designed to scale back security commitments abroad.
In a release shared online, Rep. Rick Allen said: “With President Trump’s signature, the FY2026 NDAA officially delivers on our peace-through-strength agenda with a generational investment in our national defense.”
TRUMP ADMIN ANNOUNCES $11B TAIWAN ARMS SALES DEAL
U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. December 11, 2025. (Al Drago/Reuters)
“Not only does this bipartisan bill ensure America’s warfighters are the most lethal and capable fighting force in the world, but it also improves the quality of life for our service members in the 12th District and nationwide,” he added.
As previously reported by Fox News Digital, the Senate passed the NDAA on Wednesday, sending the compromise bill approved with bipartisan support to the president’s desk.
Trump signed it quietly Thursday evening, according to Reuters.
The NDAA includes $800 million for Ukraine over the next two years as part of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which pays US firms for weapons for Ukraine’s military.
It also includes $175 million for the Baltic Security Initiative, which supports Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.
TRUMP TOUTS BRINGING COUNTRY BACK FROM ‘BRINK OF RUIN’
President Donald Trump announced his proposal for a ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system in the United States on May 20, 2025. (Reuters/Leah Millis/File Photo; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The bill prohibits reducing U.S. troop levels in Europe below 76,000 for more than 45 days without formal certification by Congress.
The legislation also restricts the administration from reducing U.S. forces in South Korea below 28,500 troops.
Trump ultimately backed the bill in part because it codifies some of his executive orders, including funding the Golden Dome missile defense system and getting rid of diversity, equity and inclusion programs, per Reuters.
TRUMP TO HAND OUT $2.6B IN ‘WARRIOR DIVIDENDS’ — AND THE SURPRISING POT HE’S PULLING THE MONEY FROM
The seal of the Department of War is displayed inside the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. (elal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)
“Under President Trump, the U.S. is rebuilding strength, restoring deterrence, and proving America will not back down. President Trump and Republicans promised peace through strength. The FY26 NDAA delivers it,” House Speaker Mike Johnson had said in a statement Dec. 7 on the new measures.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.
Politics
State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California
Despite complaints from customers about rising electric bills, the California Public Utilities Commission voted 4 to 1 on Thursday to keep profits at Southern California Edison and the state’s other big investor-owned utilities at a level that consumer groups say has long been inflated.
The commission vote will slightly decrease the profit margins of Edison and three other big utilities beginning next year. Edison’s rate will fall to 10.03% from 10.3%.
Customers will see little impact in their bills from the decision. Because the utilities are continuing to spend more on wires and other infrastructure — capital costs that they earn profit on — that portion of customer bills is expected to continue to rise.
The vote angered consumer groups that had detailed in filings and hearings at the commission how the utilities’ return on equity — which sets the profit rate that the companies’ shareholders receive — had long been too high.
Among those testifying on behalf of consumers was Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Gas. Ellis estimated that the companies’ profit margin should be closer to 6%.
He argued in a filing that the California commission had for years authorized the utilities to earn an excessive return on equity, resulting in an “unnecessary and unearned wealth transfer” from customers to the companies.
Cutting the return on equity to a little more than 6% would give Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, SDG&E and SoCalGas a fair return, Ellis said, while saving their customers $6.1 billion a year.
The four commissioners who voted to keep the return on equity at about 10% — the percentage varies slightly for each company — said they believed they had found a balance between the 11% or higher rate that the four utilities had requested and the affordability concerns of utility customers.
Alice Reynolds, the commission’s president, said before the vote that she believed the decision “accurately reflects the evidence.”
Commissioner Darcie Houck disagreed and voted against the proposal. In her remarks, she detailed how California ratepayers were struggling to pay their bills.
“We have a duty to consider the consumer interest in determining what is a just and reasonable rate,” she said.
Consumer groups criticized the commission’s vote.
“For too long, utility companies have been extracting unreasonable profits from Californians just trying to heat or cool their homes or keep the lights on,” said Jenn Engstrom at CALPIRG. “As long as CPUC allows such lofty rates of return, it incentivizes power companies to overspend, increasing energy bills for everyone.”
California now has the nation’s second-highest electric rates after Hawaii.
Edison’s electric rates have risen by more than 40% in the last three years, according to a November analysis by the commission’s Public Advocates Office. More than 830,000 Edison customers are behind in paying their electric bills, the office said, each owing a balance of $835 on average.
The commission’s vote Thursday was in response to a March request from Edison and the three other big for-profit utilities. The companies pointed to the January wildfires in Los Angeles County, saying they needed to provide their shareholders with more profit to get them to continue to invest in their stock because of the threat of utility-caused fires in California.
In its filing, Edison asked for a return on equity of 11.75%, saying that it faced “elevated business risks,” including “the risk of extreme wildfires.”
The company told the commission that its stock had declined after the Jan. 7 Eaton fire and it needed the higher return on equity to attract investors to provide it with money for “wildfire mitigation and supporting California’s clean energy transition.”
Edison is facing hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims of the fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. The company has said the fire may have been sparked by its 100-year-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which it kept in place even though it hadn’t served customers since 1971.
Return on equity is crucial for utilities because it determines how much they and their shareholders earn each year on the electric lines, substations, pipelines and the rest of the system they build to serve customers.
Under the state’s system for setting electric rates, investors provide part of the money needed to build the infrastructure and then earn an annual return on that investment over the assets’ life, which can be 30 or 40 years.
In a January report, state legislative analyst Gabriel Petek detailed how electric rates at Edison and the state’s two other biggest investor-owned electric utilities were more than 60% higher than those charged by public utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. The public utilities don’t have investors or charge customers extra for profit.
Before the vote, dozens of utility customers from across the state wrote to the commission’s five members, who were appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, asking them to lower the utilities’ return on equity.
“A profit margin of 10% on infrastructure improvements is far too high and will only continue to increase the cost of living in California,” wrote James Ward, a Rancho Santa Margarita resident. “I just wish I could get a guaranteed profit margin of 10% on my investments.”
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Washington1 week agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa6 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine3 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota5 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska lands commitment from DL Jayden Travers adding to early Top 5 recruiting class