Kevin Frazier will join the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University as an Assistant Professor starting this Fall. He currently is a clerk on the Montana Supreme Court.
Jeremy is the author of American Inequality and an adjunct professor at Presidio Graduate School. His research focuses on the interconnected nature of inequality across regions.
“Una Nación bajo Dios, entera, con libertad y justicia para todos.”
How can a nation promote liberty and justice for all if it does not do its utmost to communicate with its citizens?
More than 75 percent of residents in Miami-Dade County speak a language other than English at home. Nationwide, as of 2019, 70 percent of Latinos ages five and older spoke Spanish at home. In total, upwards of 37 million Americans, at a minimum, would prefer if not benefit from more government resources being available in Spanish.
En otras palabras, esta es una nación mucho diferente de los Estados Unidos cuando Jefferson, Washington, y Hamilton eran las personas más importantes. Even though the number of Americans who speak another language other than English at home has tripled since 1980, the majority of our textbooks and statutes resemble a bygone era.
As long as our schools and systems of government and commerce fail to reflect our multicultural and multilingual society, we will fall short of our collective potential. By way of example, consider that eight states, including Louisiana, still require high school students to pass exit-exams to graduate--despite substantial evidence that such exams disproportionately result in Black and Latino missing out on receiving their diplomas. There is also no evidence that exit exams improve academic achievement or employment rates. For “English Learners” or students who do not speak English as their first language, this out of date insistence on the supremacy of English can come at a cost to the individual student and their community.
Louisiana provides a useful and infuriating case study. In 2019, 80 percent of all Louisiana high school students graduated; yet, for English Learners the graduation rate hovered around 41 percent. This discrepancy can be partially explained by the state’s insistence on assigning exit-exams--the same exams that research suggests fail to actually hold schools accountable for providing students with adequate instruction in core concepts.
The outdated and discriminatory effect of such exams became clear during the pandemic. When several states gave up on exit exams due to the practical difficulties imposed by COVID, graduation rates for English Learners increased seven percent. Es obvio que esta práctica debe permanecer en el pasado.
A multilingual education system and economy would lift up communities across the country. As evidenced by the graphic, there are pockets of the country where an outdated systemic bias toward English has caused poverty to spread where diverse, multilingual systems could blossom. In Starr County, Texas, one in two residents lacks proficiency in English. It’s the least English-speaking county in America. One in three people there live in poverty – the median income is $31K. White students graduate at a 25% higher rate than Hispanic students.
Meanwhile, in Miami-Dade County, Florida, one in three residents lack English proficiency and yet the median income is nearly twice as high. Additionally, there is a much smaller gap in high school graduate rates. In 2019, Hispanic students in Miami had 89% graduate rate and White students had a 93% graduate rate. Miami has embraced Spanish and also helped English become its most studied language, ensuring that students thrive regardless of their first language.
An increase in Spanish in our school and legal system would not transform Starr County into Silicon Valley. No esa la meta. In some parts of the country, an excessive focus on English proficiency has unnecessarily and irrevocably robbed communities of graduates--as well as future leaders and entrepreneurs.
Just as other countries have long insisted on providing students with a multilingual education and distributing government materials in several languages, the United States must recognize that a global, interconnected world will not prioritize English. Es difícil hablar una lengua nueva. But when has America ever been the country that cowers when challenged?



















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.