PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 3, 2025
Designation of English as the Official Language of the United States Act of 2025
This bill establishes English as the official language of the United States.
The bill specifies that the official functions of government in the United States, including in each state and the District of Columbia, shall be conducted in English. Exceptions to this requirement include (1) actions or documents to protect the public health or safety, (2) actions or documents that protect the rights of victims of crimes or criminal defendants, and (3) requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
The bill also establishes a framework for implementation and enforcement, including by testing English language ability as part of the naturalization process.
People & committees
Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4] · R–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Jul 31, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1772 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1772 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1772 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1772 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill would make English the official language of the United States and require federal government functions to be conducted in English, with exceptions including public safety, commerce, and certain individual rights. It would require naturalization ceremonies in English and require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue a proposed rule on uniform English testing for naturalization applicants, for public notice and comment, within 180 days after enactment. It would also create a legal presumption favoring English language requirements and workplace policies in both the public and private sectors. These are proposed changes, not established enacted law in the supplied record.
The official language of the United States is English.
The official functions of the Government of the United States shall be conducted in English.
(3) actions, documents, or policies necessary for national security, international relations, trade, tourism, or commerce; (4) actions or documents that protect the public health and safety; (5) actions or documents that facilitate the activities of the Bureau of the Census in compiling any census of population; (6) actions that protect the rights of victims of crimes or criminal defendants;
All naturalization ceremonies shall be conducted in English.
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, issue for public notice and comment a proposed rule for uniform testing of English language ability of candidates for naturalization
English language requirements and workplace policies, whether in the public or private sector, shall be presumptively consistent with the laws of the United States.
Section 1 names the proposal the “Designation of English as the Official Language of the United States Act of 2025.”
This Act may be cited as the Designation of English as the Official Language of the United States Act of 2025.
The bill's findings describe linguistic diversity as beneficial and English as a historical common bond. They assert that states have authority to establish and promote English as their official language within constitutional and state-law limits, and state that President Trump signed an official-English executive order on March 1, 2025. These are statements in the proposed findings, not independently verified conclusions.
The Congress finds and declares the following: (1) The United States is composed of individuals from diverse ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds, and continues to benefit from this rich diversity. (2) Throughout the history of the United States, the common thread binding individuals of differing backgrounds has been the English language.
(3) Among the powers reserved to the States respectively is the power to establish the English language as the official language of the respective States, and otherwise to promote the English language within the respective States, subject to the prohibitions enumerated in the Constitution of the United States and in laws of the respective States. (4) President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive order on March 1, 2025 Designating English as the Official Language of The United States.
Section 3 would designate English as the official national language and require federal representatives to preserve and strengthen its official role, including encouraging more opportunities to learn English.
The official language of the United States is English.
Representatives of the Federal Government shall have an affirmative obligation to preserve and enhance the role of English as the official language of the Federal Government. Such obligation shall include encouraging greater opportunities for individuals to learn the English language.
The proposed English requirement would cover federal official functions that bind the government, are required by law, or are subject to press or public scrutiny. It would apply to laws, public proceedings, regulations, publications, orders, actions, programs, and policies, subject to listed exceptions. For this section, “United States” means the states and the District of Columbia.
The official functions of the Government of the United States shall be conducted in English.
For the purposes of this section, the term United States means the several States and the District of Columbia, and the term official refers to any function that (i) binds the Government, (ii) is required by law, or (iii) is otherwise subject to scrutiny by either the press or the public.
This section shall apply to all laws, public proceedings, regulations, publications, orders, actions, programs, and policies, but does not apply to—
The official-functions requirement would exclude language teaching, requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the use of specialized terms or phrases from other languages.
but does not apply to— (1) teaching of languages; (2) requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act;
(7) using terms of art or phrases from languages other than English.
Actions, documents, or policies necessary for national security, international relations, trade, tourism, or commerce would also be excluded from the official-functions English requirement.
but does not apply to—
(3) actions, documents, or policies necessary for national security, international relations, trade, tourism, or commerce;
Further exceptions would cover actions or documents protecting public health and safety or helping the Census Bureau compile a population census. Actions protecting crime victims' or criminal defendants' rights would also be excluded.
but does not apply to—
(4) actions or documents that protect the public health and safety; (5) actions or documents that facilitate the activities of the Bureau of the Census in compiling any census of population; (6) actions that protect the rights of victims of crimes or criminal defendants;
Under its naturalization provision, the bill says all citizens should generally be able to read and understand the English text of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and federal laws made under the Constitution. It separately requires all naturalization ceremonies to be in English; the reading standard uses “should,” while the ceremony requirement uses “shall.”
164. Uniform english language rule for naturalization (a) Uniform language testing standard All citizens should be able to read and understand generally the English language text of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the laws of the United States made in pursuance of the Constitution. (b) Ceremonies All naturalization ceremonies shall be conducted in English.
Members of Congress and federal officers or agents could still communicate unofficially with someone in another language through any medium while performing their duties, provided official functions are performed in English.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed— (1) to prohibit a Member of Congress or any officer or agent of the Federal Government, while performing official functions, from communicating unofficially through any medium with another person in a language other than English (as long as official functions are performed in English);
The new official-language chapter could not be interpreted to limit the preservation or use of Native Alaskan or Native American languages, as defined by the Native American Languages Act. That referenced Act is not supplied, so the precise scope of its definitions and interaction with this proposal cannot be determined here.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed—
(2) to limit the preservation or use of Native Alaskan or Native American languages (as defined in the Native American Languages Act);
The chapter also could not be interpreted to disparage a language, discourage anyone from learning or using a language, or conflict with the Constitution. These are instructions for interpreting the chapter, not a determination about its constitutionality.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed—
(3) to disparage any language or to discourage any person from learning or using a language; or (4) to be inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States.
A person injured by a violation of the new official-language chapter could bring a civil lawsuit and obtain appropriate relief. The provision includes actions under chapter 151 of title 28, but does not specify the particular remedies available. The referenced chapter is not supplied.
166. Standing A person injured by a violation of this chapter may in a civil action (including an action under chapter 151 of title 28) obtain appropriate relief.
Section 4 would make English language requirements and workplace policies presumptively consistent with federal law in both the public and private sectors. This creates a starting legal assumption of consistency, rather than expressly declaring every such requirement or policy lawful.
English language requirements and workplace policies, whether in the public or private sector, shall be presumptively consistent with the laws of the United States.
Section 4 would also require unclear English wording in federal laws to be interpreted consistently with the final two articles of the Bill of Rights, preserving rights retained by the people and powers reserved to the states or the people.
Any ambiguity in the English language text of the laws of the United States shall be resolved, in accordance with the last two articles of the Bill of Rights, not to deny or disparage rights retained by the people, and to reserve powers to the States respectively, or to the people.
Section 5 would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue a proposed rule for uniform English testing of naturalization applicants within 180 days after enactment, with public notice and an opportunity to comment. That deadline is for a proposed rule, not a completed final rule or test.
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, issue for public notice and comment a proposed rule for uniform testing of English language ability of candidates for naturalization
The proposed testing rule would have to follow the principle that citizens should generally be able to read and understand the English text of the founding documents and federal laws made under the Constitution. It would also follow the principle that exceptions should be limited to extraordinary circumstances, with asylum given as an example. This language does not itself guarantee an exemption to every asylum recipient. Existing naturalization law is not supplied, so changes to particular existing testing exceptions cannot be established here.
based upon the principles that— (1) all citizens should be able to read and understand generally the English language text of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the laws of the United States which are made in pursuance thereof; and (2) any exceptions to this standard should be limited to extraordinary circumstances, such as asylum.
The statutory changes in sections 3 and 4 would take effect 180 days after enactment.
The amendments made by sections 3 and 4 shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated July 31, 2026, records introduction in the House on March 3, 2025, and referral that day to the Committee on Education and Workforce and the Committee on the Judiciary. It does not establish what happened beyond the actions supplied.
Source snapshot updated 2026-07-31T08:06:56Z.
2025-03-03: Introduced in House
2025-03-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No provision meeting the rider definition was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of riders in other versions or accompanying materials, or any amendment's attachment history.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials; formal earmark disclosures and related materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a specific safeguard against restrictions under its main policy that qualifies as targeted treatment. Classification does not determine whether the safeguard is justified.
Users and preservers of Native Alaskan and Native American languages would receive an express safeguard: the official-language chapter could not be interpreted to limit preservation or use of those languages. Within the broader English-language policy, this protects a specified set of languages against limitations, beyond the chapter's general instruction not to disparage languages or discourage their use. The finding concerns that specific protection, not merely equal access to generally available services or rights. The referenced Native American Languages Act is absent, so the precise scope of the covered languages and interaction with existing protections remain uncertain.
The official functions of the Government of the United States shall be conducted in English.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed—
(2) to limit the preservation or use of Native Alaskan or Native American languages (as defined in the Native American Languages Act);
(3) to disparage any language or to discourage any person from learning or using a language;
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jul 31, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI