With an executive order signed on March 1, 2025, President Donald Trump declared English the official language of the United States—the first such proclamation in U.S. history. This declaration that a “nationally designated language is at the core of a unified and cohesive society,” carries more than symbolic weight: it also mandates concrete changes to the federal government’s policies related to the provision of information and services in languages other than English (known as language access).
Executive Order 14224 makes three primary policy changes related to language access at the federal level. First, it revokes Executive Order 13166, a quarter-century-old order requiring federal agencies to take several steps to improve access to their programs for the nation’s nearly 28 million limited English proficient (LEP) individuals. Second, it orders the attorney general to rescind and then update guidance issued following the Clinton-era executive order. Third, it makes clear that federal agencies can still provide language access, though the extent and nature of those measures are left to the discretion of agency leaders.
While the new executive order cannot and does not seek to undo aspects of civil-rights law that require removal of language barriers to federally funded programs and services, it seems likely that the president’s order will lead to less coordinated and consistent efforts by federal agencies to provide language access in programs they directly deliver. Future steps the Trump administration takes as part of the new executive order could also further disrupt the existing policy framework that has sought to ensure consistency and quality in efforts to provide language access in federal programs.
Although downstream effects can be expected for state and local language access initiatives, they are not directly implicated by the Trump executive order. In fact, the potential reduction in proactive federal language access efforts may cause state and local policies to become even more consequential for ensuring language barriers do not impede access to critical government programs and communications.
The Implications of Revoking Executive Order 13166
Issued in 2000 by the Clinton administration, Executive Order 13166 sought to improve access to federal programs for individuals with limited proficiency in English. The order addressed both programs delivered directly to the public by federal agencies as well as “federally assisted programs and activities,” that is, those funded or supported by federal agencies but delivered by state and local governments, community-based organizations, or other non-federal service providers.
Prior to the Clinton order, civil-rights law and regulations that require meaningful access for LEP individuals had applied primarily to entities receiving federal funding or other assistance rather than federal agencies themselves. Executive Order 13166 extended the obligation to provide language access to federal agencies themselves, applying these requirements to federally delivered programs such as Social Security as well as exclusive functions of the federal government, including immigration processing and enforcement.
With the advent of Executive Order 13166, federal agencies were also required to develop language access plans. Since then, dozens of federal agencies have developed and updated plans in response to Executive Order 13166 and subsequent Justice Department memos in 2010 and 2022 affirming the policy. These documents detailed how federal agencies would provide their own services and information in languages other than English for LEP individuals. The latter component was especially important for federal agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which deliver critical public health and safety information.
New Flexibility: How Will It Be Used?
The Trump policy shift means that federal agencies no longer must take specifically defined steps related to language access but can do so if agency heads deem such steps appropriate or necessary. The executive order explicitly does not prohibit federal agencies from providing multilingual services, noting that they “are not required to amend, remove, or otherwise stop production of documents, products, or other services prepared or offered in languages other than English.” The order also directly states that it neither “requires or directs any change in the services provided by any agency.”
Federal agency leaders now have considerable leeway related to providing language access in the programs they directly deliver. A fact sheet released with the new executive order states this, noting that agencies “will have flexibility to decide how and when to offer services in languages other than English to best serve the American people and fulfill their agency mission.” Due to this newfound flexibility, the range of responses may vary. Some agencies may choose to keep some of their policies and practices in place (though language access plans issued pursuant to Executive Order 13166 will likely have to be revised). In particular, agencies with significant direct contact with LEP individuals (such as the Department of Homeland Security and its immigration-focused components) as well as those with the need to provide critical public messaging in languages other than English (for example the CDC) will likely continue to have significant practical needs to continue robust language access efforts.
Given the administration’s designation of English as the official national language; its overall stance towards immigration; and its efforts to dismantle initiatives related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and access, other agencies may reduce the emphasis they place on language access in the programs they directly deliver. Even if agency leadership continues to see language access as a priority, new and looming federal funding and staffing cuts made as part of the Trump administration’s efficiency efforts may also blunt agencies’ capacity to advance this work.
Potential Impacts on Guidance Used to Define Civil-Rights Requirements
While the loosening of requirements around language access for federal agencies themselves has been a widely discussed facet of the policy shift, less attention has been given to the effects the new executive order could have on processes and guidance that support compliance with existing civil-rights requirements when federally funded services are delivered at state and local levels.
As noted, Executive Order 13166 did not establish the requirement for recipients of federal funding to provide language access. That mandate instead stems from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as longstanding court decisions, which Executive Order 13166 sought to reinforce and support. Following the issuance of Executive Order 13166, the Justice Department released a guidance document (known as LEP Guidance) that provided standards, models, and best practices to recipients of federal funding. This guidance listed steps that federally assisted programs should (or could, in some cases) take to comply with obligations to provide language access. Executive Order 13166 also directed federal agencies providing financial assistance to develop their own guidance documents, based on the original Justice Department guidance, tailored to their specific service sector, types of recipients, and individuals served.
These guidance documents have served as critical sources of information, standards, best practices, and technical assistance for the array of government programs and service providers that receive federal funds and seek to comply with federal language access mandates. For example, components of LEP guidance documents advised creating language access plans or taking steps to ensure the delivery of timely, accurate multilingual services; these in turn have become foundational elements of many recipients’ efforts to ensure they are prepared to serve LEP individuals.
As a result, the Trump administration’s recission of the existing guidance creates new uncertainty for state and local governments and organizations that receive federal funds in fields such as health care, education, emergency services, and public benefits. Although Title VI and other federal laws and regulations related to language access have not been eliminated, the attorney general and by extension the Justice Department will now have to update and issue revised guidance documents. It is unclear if other federal agencies will issue their own LEP Guidance documents again given that the requirements to do so under Executive Order 13166 no longer exist.
The direction the Justice Department might take remains unclear. If it provides less detailed guidance or even seeks to downplay requirements for recipients of federal funds to provide language access, some programs and service providers may reduce their focus on language access, particularly if their existing efforts to do so were previously based mostly, or even entirely, on complying with federal requirements.
Similarly, broader efforts by federal agencies to underscore the importance of language access requirements and support and monitor recipients could diminish. Ultimately, the potential loss of requirements for certain proactive efforts by federal agencies may return the policy landscape to earlier times when removal of language barriers in federal programs needed to be undertaken on a more reactive, case-by-case basis.
Implications for State and Local Efforts
With challenges at the federal level, some state and local governments, recognizing the practical need and collective benefits of providing language access, may step in to leverage their own initiatives or policies to maintain specific requirements as a means to ensure language barriers do not block eligible individuals from accessing programs.
Over the past two decades, many states and localities have developed their own language access laws and policies. As past Migration Policy Institute (MPI) research has explored, these measures often codify or reinforce federal guidance related to language access. They also reflect the desire of many states and localities to respond to an increasingly linguistically diverse public and to develop more coordinated, standardized approaches across agencies.
Although there may be downstream effects from a weakening of federal requirements, the new executive order does not eliminate or override these state and local laws and policies or less formal efforts by state and local governments (i.e., those not organized by an official law or policy). Even with revised guidance from the Justice Department, state and local governments as well as other service providers will retain flexibility and latitude to respond to LEP individuals in the manner they see fit. In fact, with the potential weakening of federal efforts on language access, state and local policies will likely become even more consequential for ensuring language barriers do not impede access to critical government programs along with providing space for innovation and advancement on language access.
Life After Executive Order 13166
Although much commentary has focused on the symbolic impacts of the Trump administration’s designation of English as the country’s official language, the consequences for federal policy on language access are also notable and, in fact, more tangible—with impacts and uncertainty ahead for LEP individuals themselves, recipients of federal funding, and the broader language access field.
Still, given the grounding of language access requirements in federal civil-rights law and regulations that remain intact, language access has not by any means been eliminated in federal programs. Recipients of federal funding are still obligated to take steps to provide access to their programs for LEP individuals, and the Trump administration’s executive order explicitly allows federal agencies to continue offering multilingual services and materials, perhaps recognizing the practical need for language accessibility in government programs and communications in such a linguistically diverse society.
Even so, the revocation of Executive Order 13166 has removed a key plank in the framework that supports language access across federal programs. This framework has always had gaps, but also comprised an important foundation upon which to build efforts to support improved language access. Whether that framework will stay intact, wobble, or collapse under the Trump administration remains to be seen.
Shifting Priorities: How the Official English Executive Order Could Affect Language Access Efforts
With an executive order signed on March 1, 2025, President Donald Trump declared English the official language of the United States—the first such proclamation in U.S. history. This declaration that a “nationally designated language is at the core of a unified and cohesive society,” carries more than symbolic weight: it also mandates concrete changes to the federal government’s policies related to the provision of information and services in languages other than English (known as language access).
Executive Order 14224 makes three primary policy changes related to language access at the federal level. First, it revokes Executive Order 13166, a quarter-century-old order requiring federal agencies to take several steps to improve access to their programs for the nation’s nearly 28 million limited English proficient (LEP) individuals. Second, it orders the attorney general to rescind and then update guidance issued following the Clinton-era executive order. Third, it makes clear that federal agencies can still provide language access, though the extent and nature of those measures are left to the discretion of agency leaders.
While the new executive order cannot and does not seek to undo aspects of civil-rights law that require removal of language barriers to federally funded programs and services, it seems likely that the president’s order will lead to less coordinated and consistent efforts by federal agencies to provide language access in programs they directly deliver. Future steps the Trump administration takes as part of the new executive order could also further disrupt the existing policy framework that has sought to ensure consistency and quality in efforts to provide language access in federal programs.
Although downstream effects can be expected for state and local language access initiatives, they are not directly implicated by the Trump executive order. In fact, the potential reduction in proactive federal language access efforts may cause state and local policies to become even more consequential for ensuring language barriers do not impede access to critical government programs and communications.
The Implications of Revoking Executive Order 13166
Issued in 2000 by the Clinton administration, Executive Order 13166 sought to improve access to federal programs for individuals with limited proficiency in English. The order addressed both programs delivered directly to the public by federal agencies as well as “federally assisted programs and activities,” that is, those funded or supported by federal agencies but delivered by state and local governments, community-based organizations, or other non-federal service providers.
Prior to the Clinton order, civil-rights law and regulations that require meaningful access for LEP individuals had applied primarily to entities receiving federal funding or other assistance rather than federal agencies themselves. Executive Order 13166 extended the obligation to provide language access to federal agencies themselves, applying these requirements to federally delivered programs such as Social Security as well as exclusive functions of the federal government, including immigration processing and enforcement.
With the advent of Executive Order 13166, federal agencies were also required to develop language access plans. Since then, dozens of federal agencies have developed and updated plans in response to Executive Order 13166 and subsequent Justice Department memos in 2010 and 2022 affirming the policy. These documents detailed how federal agencies would provide their own services and information in languages other than English for LEP individuals. The latter component was especially important for federal agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which deliver critical public health and safety information.
New Flexibility: How Will It Be Used?
The Trump policy shift means that federal agencies no longer must take specifically defined steps related to language access but can do so if agency heads deem such steps appropriate or necessary. The executive order explicitly does not prohibit federal agencies from providing multilingual services, noting that they “are not required to amend, remove, or otherwise stop production of documents, products, or other services prepared or offered in languages other than English.” The order also directly states that it neither “requires or directs any change in the services provided by any agency.”
Federal agency leaders now have considerable leeway related to providing language access in the programs they directly deliver. A fact sheet released with the new executive order states this, noting that agencies “will have flexibility to decide how and when to offer services in languages other than English to best serve the American people and fulfill their agency mission.” Due to this newfound flexibility, the range of responses may vary. Some agencies may choose to keep some of their policies and practices in place (though language access plans issued pursuant to Executive Order 13166 will likely have to be revised). In particular, agencies with significant direct contact with LEP individuals (such as the Department of Homeland Security and its immigration-focused components) as well as those with the need to provide critical public messaging in languages other than English (for example the CDC) will likely continue to have significant practical needs to continue robust language access efforts.
Given the administration’s designation of English as the official national language; its overall stance towards immigration; and its efforts to dismantle initiatives related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and access, other agencies may reduce the emphasis they place on language access in the programs they directly deliver. Even if agency leadership continues to see language access as a priority, new and looming federal funding and staffing cuts made as part of the Trump administration’s efficiency efforts may also blunt agencies’ capacity to advance this work.
Potential Impacts on Guidance Used to Define Civil-Rights Requirements
While the loosening of requirements around language access for federal agencies themselves has been a widely discussed facet of the policy shift, less attention has been given to the effects the new executive order could have on processes and guidance that support compliance with existing civil-rights requirements when federally funded services are delivered at state and local levels.
As noted, Executive Order 13166 did not establish the requirement for recipients of federal funding to provide language access. That mandate instead stems from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as longstanding court decisions, which Executive Order 13166 sought to reinforce and support. Following the issuance of Executive Order 13166, the Justice Department released a guidance document (known as LEP Guidance) that provided standards, models, and best practices to recipients of federal funding. This guidance listed steps that federally assisted programs should (or could, in some cases) take to comply with obligations to provide language access. Executive Order 13166 also directed federal agencies providing financial assistance to develop their own guidance documents, based on the original Justice Department guidance, tailored to their specific service sector, types of recipients, and individuals served.
These guidance documents have served as critical sources of information, standards, best practices, and technical assistance for the array of government programs and service providers that receive federal funds and seek to comply with federal language access mandates. For example, components of LEP guidance documents advised creating language access plans or taking steps to ensure the delivery of timely, accurate multilingual services; these in turn have become foundational elements of many recipients’ efforts to ensure they are prepared to serve LEP individuals.
As a result, the Trump administration’s recission of the existing guidance creates new uncertainty for state and local governments and organizations that receive federal funds in fields such as health care, education, emergency services, and public benefits. Although Title VI and other federal laws and regulations related to language access have not been eliminated, the attorney general and by extension the Justice Department will now have to update and issue revised guidance documents. It is unclear if other federal agencies will issue their own LEP Guidance documents again given that the requirements to do so under Executive Order 13166 no longer exist.
The direction the Justice Department might take remains unclear. If it provides less detailed guidance or even seeks to downplay requirements for recipients of federal funds to provide language access, some programs and service providers may reduce their focus on language access, particularly if their existing efforts to do so were previously based mostly, or even entirely, on complying with federal requirements.
Similarly, broader efforts by federal agencies to underscore the importance of language access requirements and support and monitor recipients could diminish. Ultimately, the potential loss of requirements for certain proactive efforts by federal agencies may return the policy landscape to earlier times when removal of language barriers in federal programs needed to be undertaken on a more reactive, case-by-case basis.
Implications for State and Local Efforts
With challenges at the federal level, some state and local governments, recognizing the practical need and collective benefits of providing language access, may step in to leverage their own initiatives or policies to maintain specific requirements as a means to ensure language barriers do not block eligible individuals from accessing programs.
Over the past two decades, many states and localities have developed their own language access laws and policies. As past Migration Policy Institute (MPI) research has explored, these measures often codify or reinforce federal guidance related to language access. They also reflect the desire of many states and localities to respond to an increasingly linguistically diverse public and to develop more coordinated, standardized approaches across agencies.
Although there may be downstream effects from a weakening of federal requirements, the new executive order does not eliminate or override these state and local laws and policies or less formal efforts by state and local governments (i.e., those not organized by an official law or policy). Even with revised guidance from the Justice Department, state and local governments as well as other service providers will retain flexibility and latitude to respond to LEP individuals in the manner they see fit. In fact, with the potential weakening of federal efforts on language access, state and local policies will likely become even more consequential for ensuring language barriers do not impede access to critical government programs along with providing space for innovation and advancement on language access.
Life After Executive Order 13166
Although much commentary has focused on the symbolic impacts of the Trump administration’s designation of English as the country’s official language, the consequences for federal policy on language access are also notable and, in fact, more tangible—with impacts and uncertainty ahead for LEP individuals themselves, recipients of federal funding, and the broader language access field.
Still, given the grounding of language access requirements in federal civil-rights law and regulations that remain intact, language access has not by any means been eliminated in federal programs. Recipients of federal funding are still obligated to take steps to provide access to their programs for LEP individuals, and the Trump administration’s executive order explicitly allows federal agencies to continue offering multilingual services and materials, perhaps recognizing the practical need for language accessibility in government programs and communications in such a linguistically diverse society.
Even so, the revocation of Executive Order 13166 has removed a key plank in the framework that supports language access across federal programs. This framework has always had gaps, but also comprised an important foundation upon which to build efforts to support improved language access. Whether that framework will stay intact, wobble, or collapse under the Trump administration remains to be seen.
MPI's Language Access work