World Class Educator Become One.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction, and specific situations should be discussed with qualified legal counsel.
Every so often, a story surfaces: a student is told they cannot speak Spanish, or another language, in class.
Sometimes the reason given is classroom management. Sometimes it’s discomfort. Sometimes it’s the idea that “other students might think they’re being talked about,” or because the teacher doesn’t know what is being said.
Regardless of the reason, educators should think very carefully before restricting a student’s language—because language is not just speech. It is identity.
And legally, it matters.
Language Is Closely Tied to National Origin
Public schools must follow Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin.
Courts and federal agencies recognize that language is closely connected to national origin. That means rules targeting a specific language, like Spanish, can raise serious discrimination concerns.
In Lau v. Nichols (1974), the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that language barriers can deny students meaningful access to education. While that case focused on instructional access, it reinforced an important legal principle: language and national origin are intertwined.
When schools single out a language, they are not just regulating speech. They are stepping into civil rights territory.
The Real Issue: Neutrality
Schools absolutely have the authority to manage classrooms. Teachers can, and should, set expectations that support learning.
But here’s the key distinction:
- Regulating behavior is appropriate.
- Targeting one language is not.
A rule like:
“No side conversations during instruction.”
is neutral and applies to everyone.
A rule like:
“No Spanish.”
is not neutral. It singles out one group of students and one language.
If English private conversations are allowed but Spanish conversations are not, the rule is not about instruction. It is about the language itself. That is where legal and ethical concerns arise.
“Other Students Might Think They’re Talking About Them”
This is a common justification, and so is a teacher being worried that they are being talked about in another language.
But discomfort is not the same as disruption.
If students are having side conversations in any language during instruction, address the side conversations. If students are excluding others intentionally, address exclusion. If there is bullying, address bullying. If a teacher is concerned about being talked about, address building relationships.
But banning Spanish because someone might feel unsure about what is being said treats Spanish as inherently suspect. That is not an instructional justification, it is a perception problem.
And perception-based bans can easily cross into discrimination.
What Advocacy Looks Like in Schools
Advocating for students means recognizing that bilingualism is an asset, not a threat.
Students who speak other languages bring:
- Cultural richness
- Cognitive flexibility
- Global competence
- Linguistic skill
When we tell students they cannot speak their language, especially when English conversations are allowed, we risk sending a message that part of who they are is unwelcome.
That message can undermine belonging far more than a quiet conversation ever could.
The Legally and Ethically Sound Approach
If a classroom concern is side conversations, address side conversations.
If the concern is staying on task, address staying on task.
If the concern is inclusion, teach inclusion.
But do not make language the target unless it is directly tied to instruction, such as in a world language class where immersion is part of the learning objective.
The safest approach—legally and culturally—is to ensure that any rule:
- Applies equally to all students
- Applies equally to all languages
- Serves a clear educational purpose
A Bigger Picture
Schools should be places where students feel seen and valued. Language is deeply connected to family, heritage, and identity. For many students, Spanish is the language of home, love, and belonging.
Telling a student they cannot speak it, without a strong instructional reason, risks more than a legal challenge. It risks trust.
Classroom management does not require erasing identity. It requires clarity, fairness, and consistency.
If we want schools where everyone belongs, we must be careful not to silence the very voices that make our communities stronger.
Again, this article is for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. For guidance specific to your district or situation, consult legal counsel experienced in education law.
