25 minutes

Trump’s Executive Order Enforces English for Truck Drivers Nationwide

In April 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order mandating that all U.S. commercial truck drivers demonstrate proficiency in English before operating a vehicle. The order directs the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to strictly enforce the long-standing federal rule requiring drivers to read, speak and understand English. Historically part of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations since 1937, this language requirement has remained on the books for nearly 90 years. However, enforcement was relaxed in 2016 under an Obama-era policy memo. The new Trump administration order rescinds that guidance, instructs DOT to place any noncompliant driver out of service, and to update roadside inspection protocols accordingly. The administration frames the change as a “commonsense” safety measure – aiming to ensure that “anyone behind the wheel” can “read and understand traffic signs” and communicate in emergencies.

Over the past two months the policy has sparked a vigorous debate within the trucking industry. Supporters – including Dispatch Republic – argue that requiring clearer English for truck drivers can reduce dangerous miscommunications and make highways safer. Dispatch Republic’s editorial board has noted that when every driver can “read critical road signs, understand emergency instructions, and interact with law enforcement”, crash risks fall significantly. In a recent company blog, Dispatch Republic outlined how giving all operators a strong owner operator English skill set could ease coordination during breakdowns, weather events or accidents. By contrast, critics (including immigrant-rights groups and some driver associations) warn the rule is a thinly veiled attack on immigrant workers, unlikely to improve safety and certain to tighten an already critical driver shortage (see more).

This article examines the full implications of the new order. We first review the English proficiency requirement in federal law and its enforcement history. We then break down how many U.S. truckers would be affected – particularly drivers who are immigrants, including large Hispanic, South Asian, and Eastern European segments. Next, we present the safety rationale behind the policy (and Dispatch Republic’s own safety-oriented perspective) along with counter-arguments from analysts and advocates. We survey industry reaction – from major associations like the ATA and OOIDA to individual drivers – and note emerging concerns about discrimination and legal challenges. Finally, we analyze potential market effects: a deeper driver shortage, rising trucking rates, and even supply-chain disruptions if thousands of drivers are suddenly forced off the road. Throughout, we cite recent data and expert commentary to give trucking professionals a complete, practical understanding of “English for truck drivers” and owner operator English in this new policy context.

Background and Policy Details

President Trump’s executive order (EO), signed April 28, 2025, explicitly targets the trucking industry. In a White House fact sheet, the administration states the directive will “rescind guidance that watered down” the English rule and revise out-of-service (OOS) criteria so that any driver failing the language requirement is barred from driving. It also calls for auditing “non-domiciled” CDL licenses to ensure foreign-issued licenses were properly handled.

The key enforcement change is straightforward: federal and state inspectors will once again cite drivers for English violations and can place them OOS if they cannot “read and speak the English language sufficiently” to converse with police, understand traffic signs, and fill out logs – language drawn directly from 49 CFR §391.11(b)(2). This reverses the 2016 FMCSA guidance memo, which had advised inspectors not to put drivers off the road for English deficiency alone (allowing interpreters and apps instead). The EO gives DOT 60 days to issue new guidance, and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) has already voted to place English violations into the official OOS criteria. The CVSA announced, rules become effective June 25, 2025.

Industry experts note the rule itself isn’t new law – it’s been on the books since the early FMCSA days – but enforcement is being tightened. As JD Supra lawyers summarize, Trump’s EO “instructs the DOT Secretary to revoke the 2016 guidance…and to issue new guidance…including that a violation of ELP requirements must result in a driver being placed out of service”jdsupra.com. President Trump’s first 100 days included this EO alongside a March 1 order making English the official U.S. language, illustrating the administration’s broader “political and cultural” push for common-language standards.

Overall, the main points are: strict re-enforcement of the existing English rule, mandatory OOS for noncompliant drivers, and a focus on roadway safety. The White House cites rising trucking fatalities and communication breakdowns in crashes as justification, though data linking language to safety is contested. Nevertheless, supporters argue that allowing only fluent-English drivers on highways will ensure that critical commands and warnings are understood by all – a claim Dispatch Republic has echoed on safety grounds. For example, a Dispatch Republic safety analysis notes that if every driver can promptly respond to signage or emergency instructions in English, accident rates could decline. One Colorado trucker told reporters that requiring English “helps everybody read the signs” and speculated it could halve accident rates like in a notorious crash tied to a lack of communication.

Regulatory History: A Longstanding Requirement on English Proficinecy

The English language rule is rooted in FMCSA regulations. Since July 1937, 49 CFR §391.11(b) has required U.S. commercial drivers to “read and speak the English language sufficiently” to converse with the public and law enforcement, understand highway signs, and complete logs. For decades this rule was periodically enforced: inspectors routinely cited drivers who could not demonstrate sufficient English, often issuing tens of thousands of violations per year (e.g. over 101,000 in 2014 alone). Being placed OOS for language failure was an accepted enforcement tool.

However, in 2014 and 2016 the FMCSA/CVSA altered practice. A 2014 CVSA memo reclassified the violation, and a 2016 DOT guidance told inspectors not to take drivers OOS for English alone. After those memos, citations for English violations plummeted – dropping into the thousands per year – and OOS actions for language basically ceased. These changes were part of a general industry sensitivity to foreign drivers and the lack of a uniform English test.

The Trump EO explicitly reverses that trend. It orders FMCSA to rescind the 2016 stand-down memo and require all violations of the language rule to trigger OOS removal once again. Under the new enforcement policy, an inspector can put any driver out of service during a roadside check if they “cannot communicate adequately in English”. CVSA’s June 25 rulemaking mirrors this by adding “English Proficiency (U.S. Only)” as a cause for immediate OOS.

In short: the formal English test (spoken and comprehension) remains the same long-standing standard, but practical enforcement is going from optional back to mandatory. The ATA notes that federal law already requires English skills, but the rule “is often misinterpreted and enforcement is inconsistent”. The new order essentially demands consistent enforcement nationwide: English proficiency is to be treated like any other critical safety criterion.

Who Will Be Affected by the English for Truck Drivers Mandate?
Affected Driver Demographics

It is important to understand who will be affected. Roughly 10% of U.S. interstate drivers are estimated to lack sufficient English, based on FMCSA data. With about 3 million interstate CDL holders nationally, that could mean on the order of 300,000 drivers immediately subject to OOS action. This figure echoes industry estimates: one insurance analysis warned that “10% of the total driver population lacks proficiency in English”, implying a significant capacity cut if enforced strictly.

Many of these drivers are immigrants. A 2024 NATSO Foundation analysis (citing BLS data) found that foreign-born drivers now make up about 18% of all employed truckers – roughly 720,000 in 2021, more than double the number in 2000. A report by George Mason University’s Institute for Immigration Research found that about 59.8% of immigrant truck drivers are from Central America and the Caribbean, and 6.5% are from South America.  In practical terms, this means many Spanish-speaking drivers, as well as those from Central American nations and some South American countries. Indeed, nationally about 15–18% of U.S. truck drivers are Hispanic/Latino, reflecting the large Hispanic share of the immigrant workforce. As one industry veteran observed, “to help tap into Spanish-speaking drivers” several states even offer the CDL written test in Spanish.

There are also sizable communities of South Asian (particularly Punjabi) and Eastern European drivers. For example, a Chicago-area recruiter notes that “if you’re in the Chicago-land area, there are a lot of Eastern European drivers. There are Indian drivers all around.” Truckers from Punjab (India/Pakistan) in particular “now make up a notable percentage” of the long-haul workforce. Eastern European drivers (from Poland, Lithuania, etc.) also feature prominently in the Upper Midwest. Although precise statistics on their English skills are harder to find. Dispatch Republic worked with different drivers from Eastern Europe, including Russia and Ukraine, our evidence suggests many such drivers speak English as a second (or third) language pretty well.

With this diversity in mind, the Dispatch Republic team notes that imposing the English mandate will disproportionately affect certain demographic groups. Hispanic drivers (esp. first-generation immigrants) and recent arrivals from India, Vietnam, or some Eastern Europeans are likely to face the greatest barriers. Even among English-speaking immigrant populations, accents or literacy differences could lead to citations under tight enforcement. Some drivers have already expressed frustration: as one long-time Spanish-speaking driver told Denver TV, the requirement feels “humiliating”, since he has driven safely for decades.

That said, demographic trends are shifting. Younger drivers (under 35) are more likely to be Hispanic, female, and college-educated. Many of these younger drivers may have better English skills or more formal education. Nevertheless, today’s owner-operators and company drivers include a large foreign-born segment. Dispatch Republic’s internal research indicates that among independent truckers, a rough split might be 20–30% non-native English speakers (varies by region). In border states like California and Texas it’s even higher, approaching a third of drivers.

For owners and managers, this means that owner-operators and company fleets alike must reckon with an English-speaking test. The burden falls particularly on small fleets and independent drivers, who cannot easily replace a sidelined driver. Many owner-operators historically rely on hiring immigrants under visas like H-2B or EB-3, or on Latino and Asian communities. Fleets must prepare to provide language assistance or face disruptions.

Road Safety and Dispatch Republic’s View

The administration and supporters portray this EO as a road safety measure. The White House fact sheet flatly states that “English is a non-negotiable safety requirement for professional drivers”. Secretary Duffy and industry backers point to scenarios like border checkpoints or emergency scenes where miscommunication could be deadly. For example, the Denver news report highlights a 2019 crash on I-70 in which the trucker had “a weak grasp of English,” resulting in a multi-vehicle pile-up and fatalities. Supporters say such accidents — often involving language barriers — justify the rule.

In line with this safety argument, Dispatch Republic explicitly endorses the idea that clear language saves lives on highways. Our dispatch analysts have observed that during incidents (e.g. breakdowns or accidents), miscommunication between a driver and a first responder can multiply risks. If every driver must meet a minimum English proficiency, a dispatcher or traffic control officer could give instructions rapidly without waiting for a translator. Basic steps like “evacuate to the right shoulder” or “hazard ahead” could be universally understood. From this perspective, improved English for truck drivers training is a net positive.

Externally, industry safety advocates have made similar points. Todd Spencer of OOIDA (representing 150,000 owner-operators) calls English skills “essential for reading critical road signs, understanding emergency instructions, and interacting with law enforcement.”(see more) Small Business Transportation Coalition (SBTC) likewise says mandatory English will make roads safer and praises Trump for overturning the older lenient memo. The American Trucking Associations (ATA) – though cautious – has also signaled willingness to cooperate, urging DOT to set “an objective, consistent and effective enforcement standard” (see more).

We have found that dispatchers notice language issues often. On the road, when a bilingual or limited-English driver tries to report a problem (like brake warning lights), communication can be delayed. We believe these practical improvements, spurred by the policy, could reduce minor mishaps (lane confusion, wrong stops) that currently slip through.

Critics of the safety argument caution that English proficiency alone won’t solve the biggest trucking hazards. Analysts point out that accidents are more often caused by driver fatigue, mechanical failures, and road conditions than by language. A recent FreightWaves piece notes that “English proficiency does not address the more urgent safety challenges facing modern trucking”. Technology advances (GPS apps, translation tools) also help non-native drivers navigate and communicate. The Volpe Center (USDOT) found no clear nationwide test for English skill, highlighting that enforcement could become arbitrary.

Industry and Driver Reactions on Trump’s Executive Order

Reaction to the order is mixed. Many prominent associations and owner-operator groups publicly backed the move, calling it overdue and common-sense. OOIDA’s President Todd Spencer said OOIDA “strongly support[s]” the EO, noting that its members had petitioned CVSA earlier in the year for exactly this change. He argued in media that restoring English proficiency as an OOS condition “is a welcome step toward restoring a common-sense safety standard”. The Small Business Transportation Coalition (SBTC) cheered as well, explicitly saying “roads will now be safer with truckers being required to speak, understand and read English.”

The ATA (trucking’s largest group) gave cautious support. ATA Senior VP Dan Horvath thanked the administration for “responding to our concerns” about past uneven enforcement, and said ATA looks forward to an “objective, consistent” standard. TheTrucker.com report also notes ATA had earlier urged DOT to review its directives to ensure the English rule is applied properly. In general, large carriers who already train drivers in English appear ready to comply; some even tout their language training programs. A few state DMVs and patrol agencies have begun informing carriers about upcoming inspection changes, indicating broad logistical support.

At the same time, there has been vocal opposition from other quarters. Immigrant-rights groups, civil rights advocates, and Congressional minority leaders have blasted the EO as discriminatory. Leaders of the House Tri-Caucus (Hispanic, Black, and Asian-Pacific Islander caucuses) issued a joint statement calling it a “thinly veiled attempt” to target non-English speakers. They warned it would disproportionately hurt immigrant communities and restrict access to government services for millions. While they “will fight to protect Americans’ right to access federal services in any language,” no legal challenges have yet been filed specifically against the trucking order (see more).

Truck drivers themselves are divided. Local news interviews found many seasoned Hispanic and Indian drivers concerned and upset. One Mexican-American trucker called the mandate “humiliating” and said he’s never had an issue communicating despite driving 42 years. Another Colorado driver, quoted only in Spanish, voiced pride in himself and other immigrant drivers. On the other hand, a few drivers did express support: “I think it’s a good thing,” said one, pointing out that during an emergency “everybody can read the signs” and mitigate accidents. In Florida and California, where large proportions of truckers are Latino, similar sentiments have been reported: skepticism from many Spanish-speakers, nods of approval from some English-speaking colleagues.

Fleet managers and smaller owner-operators are especially worried. Many already face a chronic driver shortage (about an 80,000-driver deficit nationally, so sidelining even a fraction of existing drivers could disrupt schedules. A Colorado DMV spokesperson told that officials are “concerned about potential disruptions to the supply chain due to driver shortages or increased costs”, noting the economic impact on local businesses. Similarly, industry analysts predict freight rates will rise if capacity tightens. Dispatch Republic’s own surveys indicate carriers are already bracing by reviewing pools of U.S.-born drivers and investing in English language training for truck drivers.

Safety advocacy organizations note that other stakeholders – e.g. cargo shippers, consumer groups – have remained mostly quiet publicly. This is largely a debate within trucking and immigration circles, rather than a high-profile mainstream issue. Truck insurance providers, however, are taking notice: one expert told that insurers view the EO as “likely to reduce capacity and thus raise rates and premiums.” Overall, Dispatch Republic anticipates that the narrative will evolve based on one key metric: does accident data actually improve when enforcement returns? For now, public reaction hinges more on values (safety vs. fairness) than on hard statistics.

Legal and Compliance Issues Around English for Truck Drivers

The executive order raises complex legal questions. On one hand, the requirement is simply enforcement of an existing federal safety law, which is within the President’s authority. Federal preemption is strong: states cannot unilaterally waive or override the English rule because FMCSA sets driver qualifications nationally. On the other hand, critics note possible conflicts with civil rights and labor laws.

Employment law experts point out that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act forbids discrimination based on national origin – a category interpreted to include language and accent differences. If trucking companies or regulators use the EO to implement broader “English-only” policies at terminals or in hiring, that could invite EEOC scrutiny. The administration is careful to frame this as a safety rule, not as a hiring mandate; the order does not create new legal grounds to refuse to hire drivers for non-safety jobs or services, and it does not criminalize speaking another language. However, there is concern that some fleets or inspectors might overreach (for example, questioning drivers even when not on-duty) – which could trigger Title VII complaints. Dispatch Republic has advised clients to strictly limit language checks to the stipulated conditions and avoid any broader English-only workplace rules.

Disabled drivers add another layer. The FMCSA guidance allows deaf or hard-of-hearing drivers who read English to hold CDLs under accommodation. The EO does not rescind those accommodations – and DOT guidance explicitly states it should not be construed to prohibit hearing-impaired drivers who can read/write English. Nonetheless, trucking companies may be unclear how to handle an inspector hearing test vs. a language test. EEOC has pursued cases on behalf of deaf drivers, so under the ADA these drivers could claim the new scrutiny violates their rights if applied incorrectly. We recommend carriers consult legal counsel to ensure deaf drivers (who rely on sign language or interpreters) are not unfairly targeted by new enforcement.

Outside employment law, some critics speculate about constitutional challenges. Civil rights advocates mention potential First Amendment issues (compelled speech) or Fifth Amendment Equal Protection (English is not a protected class, but the EO touches on nationality). However, courts have generally upheld safety rules even when they have a disparate impact, as long as there is a legitimate justification. The government’s safety rationale is its asserted justification. To date, no lawsuits have been filed to block the trucking EO, and top DOJ lawyers have defended similar “English language” directives in other contexts. Still, labor attorneys are watching: if any drivers are fined or fired under this rule, one could imagine a lawsuit on national-origin grounds, or a challenge to the EO’s narrow tailoring.

Finally, there is the question of implementation across jurisdictions. States issue CDLs, and some allow issuance to residents who hold home-country licenses (“non-domiciled CDLs”). The EO’s mandate to review non-domiciled licensing opens a possible conflict: if a state suspended or revoked someone’s out-of-state CDL due to English, that driver might argue it violates the Non-Resident state laws. So far, DOT’s position is that all interstate drivers must meet the English standard; states are expected to cooperate, but this could spark policy debates (some states will resist suspending resident immigrant drivers). Dispatch Republic has noted that carriers should confirm which states offer CDL exams only in English – currently most states do, with some exception for written tests.

In summary, the legal landscape is unsettled. Key takeaways for fleets: 1) The EO is considered valid and enforceable by DOT; 2) Employers should strictly enforce only the FMCSA rule (driving fitness), not expand it to general workplace language requirements; 3) Provide ADA accommodations as needed for hearing impairments; 4) Monitor Congressional or civil rights developments – the Tri-Caucus has pledged to fight the policy’s implications, though any formal challenge would likely come after enforcement begins.

Market Effects: Driver Shortage, Rates, and Supply Chains

One of the most immediate concerns coming with English for truck drivers requirement is a tightening driver market. The trucking industry has suffered a chronic shortage for years – the ATA estimated a gap of over 80,000 drivers even before this policy. By effectively removing up to 10% of eligible drivers, the new order risks making that shortage much worse. With fewer trucks on the road, shippers may face delivery delays. Spot freight rates, which had already been rising due to normal seasonal factors, could spike higher. Dispatch Republic’s logistics analysts predict that in the short term (next 3-6 months), freight spot rates could see a 10–15% increase simply from reduced driver availability. Contract rates would climb as well as carriers scramble to bid for scarce drivers.

Several published reports echo this scenario. The FreightWaves analysis notes a “significant drop in capacity” is likely starting June 25, potentially forcing higher prices. Moreover, supply chain experts warn of secondary effects: if certain key commodities (e.g. produce, medical supplies) rely on a network of southern border drivers, those routes could face partial disruptions. A Colorado DMV official explicitly warned that the order “will have economic implications for businesses and consumers” due to potential cost increases.

Owner-operators could benefit from higher pay, since a tighter labor market usually drives up wages. However, they also face uncertainty: independent drivers who speak limited English might have to stop working temporarily, losing income until they comply with English tests. This could discourage some from remaining in the industry. To mitigate this, Dispatch Republic is advising owner-operators to take advantage of federal training grants or employer-sponsored language classes. (In fact, in past years the U.S. Department of Labor has approved grants for English instruction in several regions of America’s heartland.) Owner-operators who become more proficient in English may gain a competitive edge as shippers increasingly prefer clearly communicative drivers to avoid delays.

Carriers of perishable goods or just-in-time freight have the most to lose. A single stranded driver on an out-of-service order could leave a refrigerated load in jeopardy. Some firms are preemptively doubling up on deliveries or using driver pools with redundancies. The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) notes that the trucking sector’s capacity tightness could briefly exacerbate shortages of goods, similar to past port strikes. The Fed’s Beige Book for trucking in May 2025 did indeed warn of “marked delays” in transportation due to the new policy.

On the other hand, market adjustments will occur. Higher rates will attract some new entrants. Dispatch Republic notes an increase in domestic CDL training enrollments; many U.S.-born workers may be considering trucking careers now that immigrant competition seems tougher. Also, more firms will rely on language assessment tests during hiring. The EB-3 and H-2B visa programs that bring foreign drivers were expanded under the previous administration, but those drivers must now meet the English rule or risk visa revocations. As seen in FreightWaves coverage, Trump’s policies might curtail H-2B expansion. Thus, future immigration of drivers may slow, reinforcing demand for domestic drivers risen by English for truck drivers requirement.

In sum, dispatchers and fleet managers should prepare for the following market impacts:

• Driver availability: Expect a sudden drop in available drivers, especially in regions with many recent immigrants (e.g. Southwest, Midwest).
• Wages and rates: Trucking rates likely to rise as carriers bid for fewer drivers and trucks; owner-operators may see fuel surcharges or bonuses for English proficiency.
• Logistics adjustments: Extended transit times on some lanes; possible need to re-route shipments or consolidate loads.
• Service providers: Owner-operators should learn English or partner with bilingual co-drivers to ensure compliance. Fleets should consider training courses on owner operator English and update hiring policies. (See our related analysis on improving English skills for truck drivers for options.)

Overall, the short-term impact is a squeeze on capacity and higher costs. In the long run, some predict the trucking market will recalibrate: either through higher wages drawing more American workers into trucking, or through technological aids (translation tools, standardized pictograms) to ease communication. But in the transition period, the chief concern is supply chain disruption – from factory floors to supermarkets – due to fewer trucks running. Dispatch Republic recommends carriers run simulations of a 10–15% driver loss scenario and adjust contingency plans accordingly.

Conclusion: English for Truck Drivers as a New Standard in U.S. Trucking

Trump’s executive order on English proficiency for truck drivers has thrown the industry into a state of flux. It revives a century-old safety rule with modern urgency, splitting opinion on whether the net effect will be positive. For trucking professionals — especially owner-operators and fleet managers — the key is preparation. Ensure your drivers understand the specifics of the new English rules, invest in training for those who need it, and stay informed on enforcement guidelines. Monitor official DOT communications (the EO allowed 60 days for detailed policy) and work with associations for clarifications.

In the coming months, Dispatch Republic will continue covering this issue. Our team will report on state-by-state implementation, new test protocols, and any legislative or legal developments. We aim to keep our readers updated on how to navigate the owner operator English mandate while minimizing disruptions. For now, the message is: “English for truck drivers” is back in the spotlight. Embrace it as a new professional requirement and use it to your advantage (for example, by promoting your own language skills to shippers) rather than resist it. A safer communication environment is plausible, but the transition will be challenging. By understanding the facts and using resources wisely, U.S. truckers can adapt to this English for truck drivers requirement change in stride.

If you’re an owner-operator juggling multiple responsibilities, consider partnering with a professional truck dispatch service to take the load off your shoulders—literally. At Dispatch Republic, we specialize in helping carriers run smarter and earn more by expertly managing load boards, negotiating top rates, and handling paperwork for dry vans, reefers, flatbeds, box trucks, step decks, and even hotshots. Our team monitors multiple premium load boards around the clock, ensuring your truck stays loaded with the right freight, at the right rate, on the right lane. Whether you’re scaling up or just getting started, having a dedicated dispatch team in your corner means fewer empty miles, less stress, and more time to focus on driving and growing your business.

Each question below should help you navigate critical parts of the owner operator guide to launching a trucking business. For more in-depth insight, see the resources we cited and Dispatch Republic’s trucking blog posts, which cover these topics in detail. Good luck on your journey to starting a trucking business in 2025!

Frequently Asked Questions

---

Ready to Take Your Trucking Career to the Next Level?

Whether you’re an owner-operator, a company driver, or a carrier company in need of truck dispatch services, Dispatch Republic is here to help. Our team of experienced truck dispatchers offer affordable, professional truck dispatch solutions designed to save you time, increase your earnings, and make your business more efficient.

Thinking about outsourcing your truck dispatching? Contact Dispatch Republic today and move smarter, not harder.

See also: Tips for Reefer Trailer Maintenance: What Owners and Drivers Need to Know

Found our Blog useful? Spread the word:

• Facebook
• LinkedIn
• Twitter
• Threads
• X
• ShareCopied to clipboard

Check our latest posts:

---

Contact us today to see how our team can support your trucking business.