Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Online Federal Multilingual Resources Continue to Disappear under Trump Executive Order

News

Online Federal Multilingual Resources Continue to Disappear under Trump Executive Order

LEP.gov, an online library of multilingual materials, used to be a resource for agencies and individuals alike but was suspended in July after Trump’s executive order.

WASHINGTON - On March 1, President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring English as the United States’ official language. Since then, some federal agencies, like the Department of Justice and the Department of Housing & Urban Development, have removed multilingual resources from their websites; others have not. The executive order does not require their removal.

Language access, or the provision of non-English translation services or materials, assists over 25 million individuals in the United States with limited English proficiency (LEP). Experts say reducing language access will hurt government efficiency.


“It will make government programs less effective because they'll be unable to reach many individuals that they might reach otherwise,” Jacob Hofstetter, a policy analyst from the Migration Policy Institute, said.

Trump’s executive order repeals a Clinton executive order that required federal agencies to provide language access for public-facing programs.

Since Trump’s order, the DOJ has taken down almost all of its multilingual resources. HUD took down much of its multilingual materials, eliminated non-English translation services, and issued an “English only policy.” Additionally, lep.gov, a centralized online library of multilingual resources, was suspended in July. The website now reads that the “materials will be replaced when new guidance is issued.”

The website, launched in 2002 by the DOJ, included links to federal agencies’ guidance on Limited English Proficiency. Hofstetter said this removal could have a rippling effect across the federal government.

“[It] was used as a model for a lot of other agencies' guidance,” Hofstetter said. “It has also been a key source of technical assistance and information for a wide range of entities that receive federal funding, that are seeking to provide language access. Though it was always guidance, the rescinding of it does also represent a pretty serious consequence for the field.”

Hofstetter said Clinton’s original executive order “filled some gaps” in previous legislation, like Title VI and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that required language access only for federally funded programs, but not federal agencies.

Trump’s guidance comes in the form of an executive order, and can’t override current law. Federally funded programs are still required to provide language access in accordance with previous laws.

Mara Youdelman, managing director of the National Health Law Program, said Trump’s executive order is confusing for some federally funded programs about their language responsibilities.

“It certainly seems to imply, ‘Well, okay, we don't have to provide services,’” Youdelman said. “But executive orders don't exist in a vacuum, and they have to be understood and read in conjunction with other requirements.”

She said this confusion is intentionally “sown by this administration” to prevent LEP individuals from getting help.

“There's also really serious public safety and public health implications that come along with language access as well,” Hofstetter said. “You can imagine if you didn't issue emergency alerts in languages other than English, folks might be exposed to dangers from natural disasters or other events solely due to their limited proficiency in English.”

A memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi says the DOJ plans to issue new language access guidance early next year.

“The Department will issue new guidance, for public comment, that presents clear, practical guidelines that help agencies prioritize English while explaining precisely when and how multilingual assistance remains necessary to fulfill their respective agencies' mission and efficiently provide Government services,” Bondi said.

Hofstetter warned that this could be just the start of limiting language.

Isabella Jacob covers immigration and demographics for Medill on the Hill. The Michigan native is a sophomore at Northwestern University studying journalism and entrepreneurship.


Read More

“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-C’ed O’odham elder, listens as Tohono O'odham Chairman Verlon Jose speaks during a news conference at the Quitobaquito Springs site on Monday, Aug. 24, 2026.

Stephanie Casanova

“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Standing near the pond at Quitobaquito Springs, Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-Ced O’odham elder, shared how her ancestors held ceremonies at the sacred site — a desert oasis in a national park that the federal government is set to bulldoze for a new border wall.

She pulled out a photo of her great-great grandparents and her great-grandparents, who would walk about 50 miles through the Sonoran Desert to the springs. The O’odham call the water flow A’al Vaipia. She showed the image of her ancestors to a group that included Indigenous leaders and a U.S. congressional representative — all there on Monday to condemn the border wall construction.

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less
The White House, Washington, DC
A large white building with a fountain in front of it

We Can and Should Reform the President’s Pardon Power

On August 21, Congressman Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a report entitled “Pardons, Inc.: How Trump and His Clemency-for-Cash Racket Let White-Collar Criminals and International Drug Dealers Walk Free and Dodge Billions in Restitution Owed to Their Victims.” As the title suggests, the report documents the president’s startling abuse of his constitutional power to grant pardons and reprieves.

If that problem were limited to Trump, we might look to the ballot box to remedy it. But it is not.

Keep ReadingShow less