Acceso usuarios
Harold F. Schiffman, Richard E. Weiner
Until recently, educational language policy in the US has been the chief site of contention about language, as seen in recent initiatives, referenda, and state constitutional amendments. Provision for drivers’ licensing testing in languages other than English (LotE), on the other hand, has often exemplified what we call expedient language policy, i.e. using a LotE for a higher end, that of ensuring highway safety and enhancing opportunities (freedom of travel, especially for economic benefits, i.e. work). In some states, however, notably an Alabama case Alexander v. Sandoval, language policy of vehicle licensing has become symbolic of other issues, and the ACLU is now pitted against the National Review, the English-Only and English-First organizations, as well as disability-rights organizations, many of whom have provided amicus curae briefs, all of which seems at first glance out of proportion to the importance of the issue at hand. Between the time this paper was proposed and the present, the Supreme Court has heard this case and found in favor of the state of Alabama and against the parties to the original suit. (The court heard Alexander v. Sandoval No. 99-1908 on January 16, 2001, and issued its opinion, for Alexander, on April 24, 2001.)
