OKLA) DELEGATION QUESTIONS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S THREAT TO CUT
FEDERAL FUNDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Members of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation today sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder seeking justification and clarification for a letter the Department of Justice (DOJ) sent to Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson threatening Oklahoma with a loss of federal funding if the state passed a constitutional amendment making English the official language of the state.
The original DOJ letter, characterized by delegation members as dubiously timed at the peak of legislative debate, advises the state that “implementation of this [English-only] amendment may conflict with Oklahoma’s obligations to protect the civil rights of limited English proficient (LEP) persons.”
Dated April 14, 2009 from Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King, the DOJ letter states, “As you know, recipients of federal financial assistance must comply with various civil rights statutes, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964…which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin.” The letter continues, “State agencies and other entities in Oklahoma that receive federal financial assistance thus would be precluded by federal law from abiding by an English-only requirement where it conflicts with their obligations under Title VI.”
The Oklahoma Congressional Delegation’s letter to Holder points out that several other states have passed similar legislation and asks if they too have been “accused by the Department of Justice to be in violation with Title VI, or formally threatened with funding termination.” The delegation letter asks for an explanation for what prompted the DOJ to write the state of Oklahoma on this issue and seeks explanation for what funds would be eliminated should Oklahomans pass the English only amendment.
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe stated, “This nation’s cultural diversity is one that contributes to the greatness of our country. I support the state’s effort to pass a constitutional amendment making English the official language of the state because it ultimately facilitates better communication across the many lines of diversity within our state. The state legislature has overwhelmingly passed this amendment, and now it is up to the voters of Oklahoma to decide if they wish to accept it. It is entirely unacceptable for the federal government to try to strong arm the state by threatening to remove federal funding. I look forward to hearing the Justice Department’s explanation for such behavior.”
QUESTION: How does English being the official language of Oklahoma violate anyone’s civil rights?
Full story @ http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6899
Just Americans Making Ethical Statements Weblog 
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 7, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Interested Bystander
Hey All,
When I commented a while ago that the Feds dictated to the States what they can and can not do, didn’t SOMEONE comment back that this wasn’t the case?
Here is proof positive that I was right.
What the DOJ is doing is UNConstitutional, and I hope that they fight this in the Courts.
November 3, 2009 at 3:58 am
English Only Ballots | Islandlaw Constitutional Rights Pages
[…] Attorney General Eric Holder’s office sent a letter to Oklahoma officials in April threatening a loss of federal funding if the state passed a constitutional amendment making English the official […]
November 23, 2009 at 12:58 am
Evan
The English Only law would infringe on non-English speakers’ ability to participate in our democracy, as all ballots would be printed only in English. Also, federal funding is not a constitutional right, so the DOJ threat would be constitutional. For example, the federal government will deny highway funds to any state which lowers the drinking age below 21. It is a bit ironic that the people who want more “states’ rights” also want to keep their federal funding.
The Supreme Court could overturn “English Only” laws on grounds that they discriminate against racial minorities. Since race is a suspect classification, it would trigger strict scrutiny. These laws are not narrowly tailored to a compelling state interest, so they would fail the strict scrutiny test.
November 23, 2009 at 9:40 am
JAMES
Evan- If they have moved to this country and become citizens, why are they not learning our language. DMV gives the tests for drivers licenses in several languages in my state, yet our street signs are all in English.
If you move to Quebec, you must learn the language.
As far as the “loss” of federal funds, as far as I am concerned, the state should keep the money here, not sent on to the federal government with the “hope” that it will come back in some form.
As we see with their handling of healthcare reform, its not about the healthcare of the citizen, it is about money and power. If we bring the control of the money back into the state, their power will diminish.
February 1, 2010 at 9:27 am
arcticchill
If Eric Holder and Evan from above had actually read what Oklahoma is proposing, they would know that it is NOT English-Only. This is blackmailing against the voters of Oklahoma.