Massachusetts Mayor Requires Translator To Communicate at Commission Hearing, Shock Ensues
“How far have we fallen as a nation when an actual Massachusetts mayor needs a translator in court?”
I’m sorry, but is it really too much to ask that public officials in America be fluent in English?
Ahead of his testimony at a Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission hearing on Friday, Lawrence, Massachusetts Mayor Brian DePeña requested the judge’s permission for his personal assistant to serve as his translator.
The judge denied DePeña’s request over concern that neither he, nor the opposing counsel, speak Spanish. “Therefore,” he said, “we’re unable to decide independently whether questions are being translated — both directions — from the attorney and from the witness accurately.”
It’s unclear if the court ultimately supplied a substitute interpreter for DePeña.
The mayor of Lawrence, MA, a once prominent manufacturing town that is now overwhelmingly Hispanic, needs a translator in court.
The judge refused to let him use the translator due to possible mistranslations
Do you think English should be required to work in city government? pic.twitter.com/p4nm3eyUOX
— Mass Daily News (@MassDailyNews) December 20, 2025
The Post Millenial reported:
The hearing concerned former Lawrence Police Chief William Castro, a political ally of DePena, who was stripped of his policing credentials following an improper police chase. Castro was accused of driving the wrong way down a city street during the chase and filing a false police report, claiming he was responding to an armed bank robbery when he had actually been responding to someone attempting to cash a bad check.
According to The Post Millennial, the Dominican Republic-born mayor arrived in New York in the early 1980s. He moved to Lawrence in 1989.
So, DePeña has been residing in the U.S. for approximately 40 years, but still cannot speak proper English? Apparently learning the English language wasn’t a priority for him.
A July 2024 U.S. Census Bureau report states that 82.3% of Lawrence residents identify as Hispanic or Latino. Apparently, due to the city’s demographics, DePeña never felt the need to learn English. Why bother to assimilate when the majority of the population speaks your language?
At any rate, DePeña’s unusual request ignited a firestorm on social media. Critics are outraged that the sitting mayor of an American city appeared unable to communicate fluently in English.
One X user wrote, “I can’t believe this is real.” He wasn’t alone.
Another responded, “Not only is it real, you’ll be attacked as racist if you say this is a problem.”
Not only is it real, you’ll be attacked as racist if you say this is a problem.
— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) December 21, 2025
One man asked, “How far have we fallen as a nation when an actual Massachusetts mayor needs a translator in court?”
How far indeed.
And I’ve saved the best for last:
Massachusetts mayor needs translator because he doesn't speak Englishhttps://t.co/nK3KWQVxSu pic.twitter.com/8dF4SUdDjm
— Mark Herrmann (@mark_herrmann) December 24, 2025
The presidency is the only elected office that requires candidates to be natural-born citizens. Naturalized citizens are eligible to run for Congress, provided they have held U.S. citizenship for at least seven years to serve in the House of Representatives and nine years to serve in the Senate.
While some foreign-born public officials may be difficult to understand at times, this is the first instance I am aware of in which an elected U.S. official has required a translator. Unfortunately, given the number of immigrants who poured over our open southern border during the Biden administration, it likely won’t be the last.
Please let me know in the comments section if you think proficiency in English should be required of candidates running for public office.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Absolutely it should be required. I don’t care if the town speaks Spanish as their first language, you live in America. We speak English, even if it isn’t recognize as our official language or even if it is.
Learn it or leave.
it’s reasonable to expect that a mayor should be able to independently read, comprehend and approve English-language documents without needing translation. Being mayor in Massachusetts involves budgets, contracts, ordinances, legal memos, police reports, state/federal compliance docs—all overwhelmingly in English. Signing off on them carries legal weight; misunderstanding could lead to poor decisions, liability, or misconduct.
1. That’s up to the voters.
2. Properly understanding all those things requires something like a lawyer’s training, which most mayors don’t have. That’s why they have staffers to explain things to them — regardless of what languages they speak and how proficient they are in them.
Hi Milhouse. How was your Christmas?
Thank you for asking, but to me it’s just another day. Not my holiday. Chanukah was nice, low key. Not a fan of doughnuts but I’ll take any excuse for latkes.
Though I always feel that, like Montana, Chanukah goes on long after it’s made its point, and that I would willingly give up two days of Chanukah to get one extra day of Purim.
“I would willingly give up two days of Chanukah to get one extra day of Purim.”
You can’t swap their days, but you can always have more Purim joy by celebrating the Megillah reading and do a little more feasting on the side.
Best regards. Hope you have a happy new year.
Right on both counts Milhouse. This is a failure of whoever ran against him. Possibly they did not speak good English either and any debates were in Spanish, if 78% of the voter speak spanish why not. If they did speak good english they should have hammered that home that he had 40 yrs to learn and chose not to, that he will need to communicate with other gov’t officials in English. And while being bilingual is a bonus you are not really bilingual if you need a translator for one of the languages.
English and only should be the official language of this country. Period. Pass a law!
Furthermore all documents should be in English especially voting ballots. No “press 1 for Spanish” should be provided on any government telephone system. No translators should be provided except in the court and medical systems.
Our schools should not teach in any language except English (excluding foreign language classes). Immersion is the best way to learn.
I have no problem with the government paying for classes to teach immigrants English as a second language. The sooner immigrants immerse themselves in our culture the sooner they will adapt. The cost is relatively small. Whether we should continue to accept immigrants is another questions.
I believe we should encourage students to learn a foreign language and even make it a requirement for graduating high school (hahaha…as if). Instead of Spanish, French, and German we should be encouraging Chinese and Arabic. We need to have more of our translators instead of relying on foreigners. Also we should start language classes in elementary school.
This is court. It’s not in evidence that he needs an interpreter in everyday life.
Just stop
Stop what, you moron? Pointing out acknowledged facts??? ztakddot just acknowledged that interpreters should be allowed in court; so what’s the objection to this mayor having one? There is none at all. The judge didn’t say he couldn’t have one, just that he couldn’t have his own.
I have no trouble with him having one in court as per my statement.
Exactly. So what is it that gonzo wants me to stop?
Milhouse wants to create the Tower of Babel again. Communications is essential to a cohesive country…. we are becoming the Balkans. What is “legal” is not the same as being “needed” or functionally desirable. If I started texting here is a foreign language, think of the delays and misunderstandings…. Jimmy Carter “lusted” after Poland and Hillary’s “Reset” button wasn’t. We are no longer rich enough to be stupid.
My “error” was either taking French in high school and Russian in college. My error was resisting to learn Spanish because so many who had lived for decades in this country confined themselves to their barrios. Maybe I should have learned Berber. In America, one can be anything they want …even not wanting to be Americans…. and get $$$ for it.
Using interpreters in court has been a fixed part of our judicial system for literally centuries. There has never been a time when they were not allowed.
Until now.
The judge denied DePeña’s request —
No, he didn’t. He denied his request to supply his own interpreter. If he still thinks he needs one the court will supply one. If he suddenly decides he doesn’t need one after all, then the judge will be proven right that that’s not what was going on.
Okay, no problemo.
Lawrence MA, the armpit of the Commonwealth.
MA has quite a few armpits and more developing every day.
You are correct!
The rest are (M)assholes.
Of course, Buzzards Bay is the official GEOGRAPHICAL armpit of Massachusetts.
A few points to ponder while you consider your responses:
1. The USA has no official language.
2. For the first ~140 years of our republic there were huge areas where the primary language was German and many of the inhabitants, US citizens and multiple-generation Americans all, had no English. To the extent that the first Congress seriously considered a proposal to have the laws published in German as well as English, so that these citizens could read them. They would certainly have been eligible for any office, including the presidency, but would have needed interpreters.
3. There’s a whole island full of US citizens, who are natural-born and eligible to the presidency, if the electors choose them, whose native language is Spanish.
4. The first president born a US citizen, Martin van Buren, spoke English as a second language.
5. That said, this mayor was not born a US citizen; he came here and presumably was naturalized. I know the language requirement is waived for elderly immigrants, but he’s not elderly, and was younger still when he was naturalized, so presumably he has enough English to pass the test. Thus the question is only whether his English is good enough to withstand cross-examination in court, and there are many immigrants who get along fine in everyday life but need interpreters when testifying, because precision is crucial.
6. Finally, while a state may of course impose language proficiency requirements on any public offices under it, only a constitutional amendment can do so for federal elected office. If the voters choose a president, vice president, representative, or senator who is not proficient in English, they have that right and neither Congress nor any state can make a law to prevent it.
Too late. Already gave my opinion. I’ll address your points.
1) Answered. Make English the official language. Done.
2) Don’t care. It’s interesting but in the past.
3) Spin the PR out as an independent country whether they want it or not. It’s a drain.
4) Don’t care. It’s interesting but in the past.
5) Don’t care. He’s been here 40 years. Enough time to become fluent or don’t run for office.
6) Pass a constitutional amendment then. Solved.
Especially 3. I was stationed there three years. The sentiment among many of my shipmates was, give it to Castro to they get what they want. Good and hard.
English was designated as the official language of the United States in an executive order on March 1, 2025.
No, it wasn’t. The president has no authority to do so.
Would you be ok if it accepted, allowed across the board to NOT require English? How would you suggest handling the close to 1000 tribal languages and dialects in Africa? The substantial
number of dialects in Spanish? Where would you draw the line? FWIW, I’ve taught and worked
with Africans from 13 nations/countries. They speak very good English, write it as well.
There appear to be some words missing in your question, so I can’t answer it directly. But if you’re asking about the use of interpreters in courts, I refer you to the way courts have handled this throughout the entire existence of our judicial system.
If you’re referring to elected officials not being required to be fluent in English, the only line is that drawn by the voters. At least as far as federal elected office is concerned, the constitution forbids any language requirement. The voters are entitled to elect whomever they choose, subject only to the citizenship, residence, and age requirements in the constitution, and if that person has no English that’s the voters’ problem.
“The voters are entitled to elect whomever they choose, subject only to the citizenship, residence, and age requirements in the constitution, and if that person has no English that’s the voters’ problem.”
I do not believe that the US Constitution has any provision on the eligibility of a state’s elected officials to be elected or hold office.
What part of “At least as far as federal elected office is concerned” did you not understand?
Wrong again. Trump designated English as the Official Language of the United States by executive order on March 1, 2025 and he is still your President.
The president has no authority to make such a designation. If you think he does, cite the statute that gives him that authority.
But even if he did have such authority, that would only make it the official language of the USA, not of Massachusetts. No law made by Congress could possibly impose an official language on a state, let alone delegate authority to do so to the president.
And that means absolutely nothing.
One year of Spanish in HS, and all I need to know is summed in one phrase…”si sueda necessitta”.
Why don’t you post your comments in Spanish and if we want to know what you said, we’ll get a translator.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard in quite a while.
🙂
Well we can always just press 1 for English.
I can speak to the “German” part. Foe several generations, my ancestors spoke German at home on the farm but English when doing business elsewhere. My grandparents stopped speaking German at home about the time I was born. I know many naturalized citizens and am reliably informed that English competency was required of them. If one is not fluent after forty years, one has not made any effort. Within two months in a Spanish speaking nation, I could conduct personal business, understand newspapers, radio and television. I even was pulled into a business meeting with a local NGO.
Very good points, Milhouse. I teach English Language Development in a heavily immigrant setting. While I’m all for people learning English (it gives me a job, after all), I’ve also found it helpful that I have both Chinese and some Spanish to help and nudge students with weaker skills and to deal with parents (who often work in jobs where communication in English is not always necessary). If they offered a course in Dari for educators, I’d sign up by Christmas of 2010. Having at least some of the students’ languages is just so useful for both building rapport and nudging along a more active approach to learning English on their part!
I had an elderly acquaintance who, on learning about my work, grouched that he had to “sink or swim” (his Jewish family fled Hitler in the 1930’s). Listening to his story, I learned that in World War I (when Jews were still Germans), his father had been a field surgeon in the Kaiser’s army. I pointed out that he probably came from a background that encouraged learning, and had some built in tools to help 2d language acquisition. I then asked how well “sink or swim” worked for the kids from Polishtown or Little Italy, whose families were in pick-and-shovel trades, and he admitted that I had a point.
Yes, I have seen kids whose parents have almost no English and worked in service industries win scholarships.
While I am officially “white”, both of my parents were US-born and grew up in homes where languages other than English were spoken.
But this Massachusetts mayor makes me think I have to work harder at my job!
“For the first ~140 years of our republic there were huge areas where the primary language was German and many of the inhabitants, US citizens and multiple-generation Americans all, had no English. ”
Lasted longer than that. From 1940 to 1945 a significant part of Milwaukee had German as its primary language. I was one of the ones who spoke no English during the first part of that period, even though I was born in 1936.
Thanks for the info. I was under the impression that the German-only era came to an abrupt end with the wave of anti-German bigotry that swept American in 1917.
“I’m sorry, but is it really too much to ask that public officials in America be fluent in English?”
Apparently so.
However, this begs many questions. Mayors do not operate in a vacuum as they often interact with other city agencies, along with county, state, and even federal agencies. Is the ‘personal assistant’ the de facto mayor for those interactions with English speakers? Is that legal? The court won’t allow that ‘lost in translation’ scenario, but tax payers must pay for those agreements made with other agencies through a translator?
The term ‘naturalized citizens’ is used in this post, but is Mayor ‘I no speak English no good’ a naturalized citizen?
If he is, proficiency in English is required to be a naturalized citizen. Did he simply forget after 40 years amongst his Spanish tribe? That’s balkinization, not a melting pot.
If he isn’t, how does one stay in America for 40 years without being an illegal alien? I think we all know the answer.
“Mayors do not operate in a vacuum as they often interact with other city agencies”
Good thing he’s not a governor, required to understand laws written in English and sign them.
1. He is a naturalized citizen, or he could not be mayor. Therefore he passed the test demonstrating “intermediate proficiency” with English, which is sufficient to get along in it.
But for testimony in court much more than that is required, and it’s completely standard for people who are more comfortable in another language to testify through interpreters. The courts are required to provide one for anyone who needs it. The only issue in this case was whether he could provide his own interpreter. The judge said no, you will use a court-appointed interpreter like everyone else.
2. Your second question, “how does one stay in America for 40 years without being an illegal alien?” makes no sense. A person can easily be here as a legal immigrant for his entire life, without becoming naturalized. There is no requirement to become naturalized. And in principle a state or city could even allow aliens to be elected to local office. But in practice none do.
IF someone can be here for years with no requirement to become naturalized, how many of them VOTE? I’m sure possibly millions – working stiffs pay for them.
Are you serious??? How can it possibly be news to you that there is no requirement for a resident to become naturalized? There has never been such a requirement. As far as I know there is no country in the world that has such a requirement, or has ever had one. So where could you possibly have got the delusion that the USA has one?
And why would a resident alien think they can vote? What makes you think they do vote in any substantial numbers? And how do “working stiffs” pay for any that do vote? The immigrants are “working stiffs” too.
Illegal alien from Mexico, who was elected to city council, and as town mayor, charged by Kansas AG for illegally voting in Kansas elections; faces 5 years in prison.
It can happen. It does happen. I’ll bet dollars to donuts this is not an isolated incident. Did I say this is what happened in Lawrence, Massachusetts? No. But it has happened.
Illegal alien from Guyana with a long criminal history hired as Des Moines, IA school district superintendent (a govt. entity with taxing authority) arrested by ICE, now in U.S. Marshals custody awaiting prosecution on gun, drug, and evading arrest charges.
Coupled with numerous news articles about illegal aliens residing in this country for decades, and my question does make sense. These things have happened, are happening, and keep happening despite leftists denying they happen.
We have an open border problem in this country; an illegal alien problem; a balkanization problem. It does make sense to be skeptical, ask questions, and expect consequences.
Yes there are probably illegals voting but not in big enough numbers to really make a difference. Where they make a difference is census count. The census counts everyone illegal and otherwise. The Constitution says the representation in the House shall be based on number of residents not citizens, not legal residents even, just residents. So California lets in 1 million illegals and gets another House seat that will be a Democrat. As far as political reasons that is the biggest reason to get all illegals out, especially from the blue states.
“He is a naturalized citizen, or he could not be mayor.”
In a country with hinky, Lupin-ish school superintendents, color me unconvinced.
Weird exceptions always happen, given a big enough country. But they’re not the norm. There’s no reason here to believe he wasn’t naturalized, and if he wasn’t some rival would probably have used it to disqualify him from a race. You can’t tell me he rose to his current position without ever facing any competition. Not even 0bama managed that; he never faced a serious election, but he achieved that not by having no rivals but by disqualifying them with precisely such information.
Stop digging! “…could not become…” is not a phrase describing the “weird exception”. Certainly you are aware that a significantly large portion of voters cast their votes based on the color of the candidate’s skin, or secondarily, nation of family origin. Gerrymander people into districts, etc, based on this and you get them electing people just like them.
“Always”, “never” and words/phrases that suggest such black and white distinction without room for a little gray in between, should be avoided to forestall silly exceptions being presented.
“He is a naturalized citizen, or he could not be mayor.”.
All it takes is for no one to ask for his naturalization papers. He is in a majority Hispanic town; who exactly is going to be racist enough to ask if he’s legal?
It’s amazing you can be so naive.
It’s possible, but it’s very unlikely. If he wanted to get into politics, why wouldn’t he get naturalized? And if he neglected to do so, somewhere along the line some election opponent would likely have found it out.
Strict adherence to the requirement to.demonstrate ‘intermediate proficiency’ with both written and spoken English as part of Naturalization process seems to be an insufficient safeguard.
Not so. “Intermediate proficiency” is not enough to deal with giving testimony in court. It is completely standard for people who get along in English but are more comfortable in another language to testify with an interpreter. The issue here was only that he wanted his own interpreter rather than a court-appointed one.
Yes it is insufficient b/c it doesn’t appear to be an objective standard to secure qualification to become Naturalized. I would propose using DLAB (Defense Language Aptitude Battery) exam as an initial screening tool. Those unable to objectively demonstrate the potential to learn English on this exam should be rejected. Then use the results of standard language proficiency testing ILR score of 0-5 (Interagency Language Roundtable) with the minimum being a 3, Professional Working Proficiency.
I didn’t make any claim about interpretation in court. Frankly though, IMO, any individual who has been Naturalized and wasn’t admitted under a special category not requiring proficiency such as age (I think it is age 55 to be exempt) shouldn’t get an interpreter. If that’s too harsh for some then at minimum they should be required to request one in advance, use the Court provided interpreter and pay the fee for it. Using the ‘no habla’ excuse day of is IMO an attempt to delay or avoid testimony/proceedings. Hold his ass in contempt, put him in jail for 72 hours.
He was not “using the ‘no habla’ excuse day of [in] an attempt to delay or avoid testimony/proceedings”. He came completely ready to proceed, but he wanted to supply his own interpreter. Which would save the court money. But the judge said he couldn’t do that, because the conversations between the witness and the interpreter would be effectively secret. If he feels he needs an interpreter, he can get a court-appointed one, whose loyalty is to the court, not to the witness.
He most certainly did. By claiming, without objective evidence, that he required an interpreter and compounded that error by failure to notify the Court beforehand it would seem to reasonable to infer that as a bad faith effort to delay/disrupt the proceedings using his unproven assertion that he ‘no habla’. That he brought his own non credentialed/non Court approved interpreter shows prior planning and pre meditation.
I am beyond the point of offering any credence to unsubstantiated claims of good faith.
I don’t understand where you are getting this notion that he tried to delay or avoid testifying. He came prepared to testify, but wanted to use his own private interpreter. Not to delay anything. It was the court that said, properly, that that’s not how it works, and if you need an interpreter we will find you one.
Obviously the court’s concern was not that he was trying to get out of something, but that he wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to have private consultations with this assistant, and have her effectively testify in his place. There’s no evidence to guide us on whether this was in fact the case, but it was a reasonable thing to be concerned about. That’s why courts use certified interpreters, who work for the court, not for the witness.
How can you stubbornly claim not to see that CommoChief’s objection is IDENTICAL to the objection of the judge, save that he suspects it was deliberate instead of merely procedural?
Henry, they are nothing alike. Chief keeps insisting that the guy was trying to delay his testimony or get out of it. That is not even remotely similar to the judge’s concern.
The judge explicitly stated his concern, so how can you think it had anything to do with an attempt to delay or evade? The judge made the obvious and correct point that there’s a good reason interpreters have to be certified by the court, and you can’t just bring your own.
If you bring your own interpreter, and you speak with her in a language the rest of the court doesn’t understand, we have no idea whether the testimony we hear from her is yours or hers. (That can be a problem even with certified interpreters who are working for the court; sometimes they try to be “helpful” by interpreting what they think the witness ought to have said, rather than what he actually said, or similar things.)
Milhouse,
If he ‘came prepared to testify’ he would have alerted his need for translation in advance so that an approved/appointed/neutral interpreter could have been scheduled. Instead he shows up, says ‘No habla’, need an interpreter and wants to have his own biased staff aide/assistant serve that purpose.
If he was ‘prepared’ then none of that would have played out. He would have alerted in advance he needed an interpreter and a neutral/approved interpreter would have been arranged for and there wouldn’t be any delay or disruption nor any later claims about misunderstanding if he went without one. Article stated it was unclear if an interpreter was provided. Either he was just fine without one or they brought in a neutral one.
IMO pulling that crap the day of is an obvious attempt to delay or disrupt the proceedings, however briefly. That he showed up with his own ‘interpreter’ instead of giving prior notice he needed one demonstrates this was premeditated.
Chief, now you’re just being ridiculous. He came prepared to testify. Why would he think to alert his need for translation in advance? He brought his own interpreter, and was willing and ready to testify right then and there. That proves he was not trying to delay or avoid testifying. How was he to know that that’s not how it works?
You’re positing, without any foundation whatsoever, that he knew his interpreter would not be allowed, and therefore bringing her was some sort of weird delay tactic. That’s just stupid.
The “mayor” isn’t the only one at fault. Also at fault are those who supported and voted for him.
Personal opinion: an elected official within the borders of the United States absolutely should be fluent in English.
I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of his politicking was done in Spanish. I hate it when any politician panders but especially when they pander by speaking a foreign language.
Politicians have campaigned in foreign languages (or had people do so for them) for centuries. How do you think candidates campaigned to German-speaking voters from 1789 to 1917?
And wherever there were large immigrant communities politicians have campaigned to them, in their languages when they could.
There’s the famous incident when LaGuardia, accused by an opponent of antisemitism, offered to debate him in Yiddish.
In some areas of the Nation with high immigrant populations and where ethnic neighborhoods speaking the language of the ‘old country’ exist or persisted sure. Outside of/away from those those areas…not so much. I’ll grant you Spanish (really more of a ‘spanglish’ these days) in parts of the Southwest and in CA.
Well, apparently that includes Lawrence, MA.
By the way, there are neighborhoods in Israel where an English-, French-, or Russian-speaker can get along for decades without having to learn Hebrew.
I never claimed it didn’t include it. I made the wholly correct observation that in much, perhaps even most of the Nation geographically, away from immigrant entrepot areas and away from areas where a critical mass of immigrants remain in place in sufficient numbers to develop durable ethic enclaves that English and no other language is not only predominant but nearly exclusive.
Outside the Eastern Seaboard area, Pacific Coast, various Islands and maybe Chicago, a couple other places in the upper Midwest and parts of PA you’d go a vary long while not hearing any language but English with very occasionally a hint of ‘spanglish’ but nothing else.
Sure, but how is that relevant to the topic here?
Milhouse,
The topic here is your claim about English v foreign languages used in the USA, the prevalence of it, the history of it, specifically in election campaigns. My point is centered on the wide geographic area in the lower 48 where this is not the case or is no longer and hasn’t been the case for quite a while.
You sometimes seem to view Nationwide issues through the prism of NYC and seek to apply the reality of NYC to the rest of the Nation. There’s a whole swath of geographic area with very few immigrants and even those didn’t really show up until a couple decades ish ago. I’m sure a NYC subway car would have riders with several different languages being spoken but that’s not what most of the USA experiences in their daily life.
Chief, we’re talking about Lawrence, MA, and people who insist that in a place like that it’s not right for foreign languages to be used in campaigning.
In most of America, where just about everyone speaks English as their primary language, campaigning in other languages doesn’t happen. You don’t have candidates in heartland America campaigning in some foreign language that none of the voters speak! You have it where there are significant numbers of voters who are more comfortable in those languages than in English. And in those places it’s completely legitimate to campaign in those languages.
It’s not 1917 anymore or even 2017,
And? What has changed? Why is something that was good enough for the founders, who had a clearer idea than we do of what sort of republic they had in mind, not good enough for us?
It’s a different time now. Nothing stays the same, We have a much greater need to prevent the balkanization of the country and that means having, no, requiring a common language and culture.
Again, how is our time different? Why do we have a greater need to prevent “Balkanization” than the USA’s founders did? They were trying to forge a nation, and yet they had no problem with the fact that large areas were inhabited by US citizens who had no English!
And remember this was at a time when France was forcing its citizens to speak Parisian French, and was banning the use of German and Occitan.
If the opposing counsel spoke sign language then a bilingual sign language speaker could have signed it to a sign interpreter who could have spoken it to the judge while being simultaneously checked for accuracy by the opposing counsel. Problem solved.
Does Mayor Jose Jimenez have a driver’s license? He’s qualified for a CDL I’m sure!
You don’t need a license to drive the city into the ground.
Lawrence was already well below ground prior to his ascension to the mayorship.
Politically incorrect as it may sound, holding a top executive job in an English-dominant country while lacking strong proficiency in the national language raises valid concerns about full independence and oversight. Lacking fluency in English introduces risks and dependencies that fluent leaders don’t have.
That’s up to the voters.
Shouldn’t be allowed to get a driver’s license. If you can’t read traffic signs, walk the fck everywhere
The English proficiency required to read traffic signs, which are deliberately designed to be understood by people with poor English, is far lower than that required for testifying in court.
50 state laboratories of Jeckyll and Hydes for better and worse.
That said, throw another baby on the barbie, it’s over.
File this story under, “You can’t make this excrement up — Dhimmi-crat Edition.”
Each day, the vile, stupid and evil Dhimmi-crats foist new levels of farcical and offensive absurdity upon Americans and the U.S.
I don’t think the founding fathers anticipated this. But we are here now, and we can sponsor and support an amendment to the constitution to require elected officials to be US citizens and speak English. Come on!
On the contrary, the founders lived with this. As a proportion of the population there may have been more German- and Dutch-speakers then than there are Spanish-speakers now. And they chose not to enact any language requirements. They even considered publishing the laws in German, but decided against it because of the expense.
Having grown up in the mid 20th century in an eastern European immigrant enclave, I know first hand how European immigrants dealt with the English language, at least since the early years of the 20th century and I suspect quite a bit earlier.
They learned English as fast as they could, and they insisted their children learn it, often to the point they wouldn’t allow the kids to speak the language of the old country outside the home… or at all.
I have an enormous extended family and there was exactly one member – my great-grandmother- who spoke no English at all.
And the reason was, the larger society did not tolerate their lack of English. Now we not only tolerate it but we insist that 77 languages being accommodated by a school system or government is normal and desirable.
So please don’t pretend that the situation that exists today is the same as the past. It is not.
That’s because they wanted to assimilate.
Today, none of those consider themselves American except to be eligible for freebies.
Today, most think of themselves as Name Whatever Country hyphenated American. They have loyalties to their former country, and only a passing thought as American just to keep their freebies.
I think ICE is long overdue for a visit.
My grandmother never taught her children, much less us, Dutch. It was only well after his death that I learned my grandfather spoke Hungarian. They emigrated to America and thus spoke English. It would have been good to learn those languages, but only as second and third languages.
I should have known that a post generating 80+ comments would feature Milhouse. 🙂
Leave a Comment