High Court Faces Language Issue

Dispute Involves Spanish-Speaking Woman

Dateline: 20 November 2000
Updated: 16 January 2001

A case under consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court could have a major effect in determining the extent to which the everyday uses of Spanish will be discouraged in the United States.

The high court on Jan. 16, 2001, heard the case of Alexander v. Sandoval, which grew out of a lawsuit brought by a Spanish-speaking woman who was unable to pass the English-language driver's exam in Alabama. Martha Sandoval, a Mexican citizen and legal resident of the United States, claims that Alabama's English-only policy violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although Alabama at one time offered its exam in foreign languages, it switched to an English-only policy after the adoption in 1990 of a state constitutional amendment that requires state officials to "take all steps necessary to insure that the role of English as the common language of the state of Alabama is preserved and enhanced."

Sandoval won the first round of her legal challenge when a federal trial judge ruled that Alabama's policy of offering the test in English only would result in a "disparate impact on the basis of national origin'' in violation of the law. In 1998, a federal appeals court upheld that ruling, setting the stage for resolution by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's decision is expected in June.

It is unknown, however, whether the court will directly address the issue of the discriminatory effect of English-only laws. One of the legal issues also raised by the case involves whether Sandoval had the right as a private individual to bring the lawsuit under the 1964 law, so it is possible that the court could sidestep the language issue on technical grounds.

In fact, in defending its position, Alabama isn't contesting the ruling that it violated the law in providing its driving test in English only. Instead, it is focusing its appeal on the right of Sandoval, and presumably any others in a similar position, to sue under the 1964 federal law.

According to news accounts, there was little discussion on language issues during the Supreme Court hearing, as most of the justices' questioning focused on arcane issues relating to application of the federal law. As a result, the decision could have more effect on the right of individuals to sue under the 1964 law than it has on language issues directly.

The court is considering the case at a time when language use is a simmering (but not decisive) political issue. On the one hand, voters in Utah in 2000 approved an English-only measure with 67 percent of the vote, and Arizonans voted 63 percent against bilingual education. On the other hand, Reform Party presidential candidate Pat Buchanan made little headway by making the issue a key part of his 2000 campaign.

Although Spanish isn't the only non-English language whose usage is growing in the United States, it is easily the nation's No. 2 language. That won't change in the foreseeable future, regardless of what the court decides. But the decision could have a bearing on how successful will be efforts by businesses and government to limit its use outside the home.