Oh, the humanity!

/

Trump Outrage Du Jour: Requiring That Truck Drivers Habla Inglés

From the executive order:

“They should be able to read and understand traffic signs, communicate with traffic safety, border patrol, agricultural checkpoints, and cargo weight-limit station officers,” the order said. “Drivers need to provide feedback to their employers and customers and receive related directions in English.”

The HOTAIR article I link to above cites numerous fatal accidents caused by a truck driver’s inability to speak English, and feel free to go there and check, but here’s the thing: Trump is merely ordering that the English requirement that’s been on the books since 1937, and rigorously enforced until Obama took office, be enforced again.

Here’s a fair, in my opinion, discussion of what this order does, and doesn’t do, from an industry publication, FreightWaves:

Trump’s Executive Order For Trucking Revives a Rule Nearly 90 Years Old

…. On April 28, a second executive order targeted the commercial trucking sector. It directed the Department of Transportation to reinstate stronger enforcement of existing federal regulations requiring truck drivers to read, speak and communicate effectively in English. The order authorized federal and state roadside inspectors to once again place drivers out of service if they are unable to meet the English proficiency standards.

Although the executive actions have generated considerable attention, the core requirement for English proficiency among truck drivers has been law for nearly 90 years.

A Regulation with Deep Roots

The requirement for English proficiency in commercial motor vehicle operations dates back to July 1937, when the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) were established.

Under 49 CFR §391.11(b)(2), drivers must be able to “read and speak the English language sufficiently to converse with the general public, understand highway traffic signs and signals, respond to official inquiries, and make entries on reports and records.”

For decades, roadside inspectors have cited drivers for violating this rule, with the authority to place noncompliant drivers out of service. By 2014, English proficiency violations were a routine part of commercial enforcement activities across the United States.

That year alone, inspectors issued more than 101,000 English proficiency violations. Over 4,000 drivers were placed out of service for failing to meet the standard.

2014 Memo: Regulation Remains, Enforcement Softens

In 2014, during the Obama administration, the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) partnered with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to reclassify the enforcement of the English proficiency rule.

While the regulation itself remained intact, inspectors were instructed not to place drivers out of service solely for English language deficiencies. Drivers could still be cited, but they were allowed to continue operating their vehicles.

After the memo took effect, English proficiency violations dropped sharply, with enforcement data showing only 7,800 to 10,000 citations issued annually between 2017 and 2024. No drivers were automatically placed out of service during that period for English violations.

This shift effectively weakened the practical enforcement of a rule that remained formally required under federal law.

2025 Executive Orders: Reviving Enforcement and National Policy

The first of the two 2025 executive orders emphasized English as a cultural and governmental standard, encouraging unity, civic engagement and consistency across federal agencies.

The second specifically returned focus to trucking safety and operational communication. It instructed the DOT to update roadside enforcement policies, allowing drivers to once again be placed out of service if they cannot communicate adequately in English.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has been tasked with overseeing the update to inspection protocols and ensuring compliance with the revised enforcement approach.

The White House framed both orders as efforts to promote road safety, operational efficiency and shared civic values.

A Divided Industry Response

Supporters of the executive orders argue that the ability to read and understand road signs, respond to safety officials and navigate emergencies in English is fundamental to public safety. Groups like the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association have voiced strong support, citing the need for clear communication among drivers, enforcement personnel and the motoring public.

Advocates further note that language barriers can contribute to delays during inspections, misunderstandings in critical situations and difficulties in post-crash investigations.

Critics, however, caution that while English proficiency is important, it does not address the more urgent safety challenges facing modern trucking.

Some argue that the executive orders focus regulatory attention on a requirement that has long existed rather than addressing gaps that continue to impact crash rates and fleet safety outcomes.

Among the critical issues cited by safety advocates:

  • Continuous license monitoring is not universally mandated across fleets, leaving gaps in notification of suspended or revoked commercial licenses.

  • Thirteen states, including Arkansas, still allow beginner teen drivers to obtain a driver’s license without completing behind-the-wheel training hours. A few years later, they’re getting a commercial drivers license.

  • Distracted driving remains a growing threat, with federal regulations lagging behind advances in mobile technology.

  • Drug and alcohol testing, while federally required, still faces compliance challenges and inconsistencies in enforcement. Hair follicle testing is a great example.

Industry experts also raise concerns about the subjectivity of roadside enforcement. Determining sufficient English proficiency can be highly discretionary, potentially leading to inconsistent or inequitable outcomes across different jurisdictions.

Training, Not Language Alone, is the Key

Recent high-profile crashes highlight the complexity of highway safety challenges that extend beyond language proficiency.

In Colorado, a crash involving commercial driver Ignacio Cruz-Mendoza resulted in multiple fatalities along U.S. Highway 285. Mendoza was alleged to have been operating without a valid commercial driver’s license and had prior offenses on record.

In that case, language was not the primary contributing factor. Licensing compliance, training adequacy and operational fitness were the deeper issues.

Similar incidents across the country emphasize that failures in training, oversight and risk management, not language alone, remain primary contributors to preventable tragedies on the highway.

Moving Toward Substantive Solutions

There is no question that the ability to communicate clearly in English is essential for truck drivers operating on American roads. Reading signage, responding to official inquiries and managing emergencies safely depend on basic language proficiency.

The emphasis on again enforcing a rule that has existed since 1937 has raised questions about regulatory priorities. While it is essential to reestablish clear enforcement guidelines, many in the industry argue that broader challenges, such as improved driver training, real-time compliance monitoring and enhanced sobriety initiatives, deserve equal, if not greater, attention.

The commercial vehicle safety landscape requires solutions grounded in comprehensive preparation, risk control and operational excellence, regardless of language. Truck drivers move America’s economy. The policies that govern them must be as practical, forward-thinking and evidence-based as the industry itself.

Reaction among Florida truck drivers is mixed, as shown in the video below. I’ll not that the driver interviewed who opposes the new enforcements says that he’s been driving for 15 years, and never had a problem with nit speaking English: he’s been in this country for 15 years and never bothered to learn the language? Time for that to change.

Progress

/

(Temporary?) end of an era

Stephen Green, via InstaPundit

MAN, DID I EVER VOTE FOR THIS: EPA canceling nearly 800 environmental justice grants.

In a filing that was entered last week but first reported by The Washington Post Tuesday, a high-ranking EPA employee states that the agency has already told 377 grantees that their awards were canceled.

The agency plans to send cancellation notifications to an additional 404 — meaning a total of 781 grants are being canceled, said the filing, a declaration from Daniel Coogan, the EPA’s Deputy Assistant Administrator for Infrastructure and Extramural Resources.

The grants are primarily related to programs that deal with environmental justice — that is, dealing with pollution in communities that face disproportionate impacts and have limited resources. This includes low-income and minority communities.

The Trump administration has targeted environmental justice programs — firing 280 staffers and reassigning another 175 who worked on the issue, saying it’s part of a broader effort against diversity initiatives.

It’s all just slush funds and payouts for progressive groups.

And from IntsPundit’s comments:

“This is an unfair characterization. It also helps discourage development of new industries while keeping local populations poor and dependent.”

Maybe we should pack off our police chief and his fellow milksops to join them in South Dakota? (Updated)

/

(reenactment of June 1, 2020 obeisance ceremony* courtesy of ChatGP)

Personally, I think that doing this to the agents five years after the event took place is cruel and unfair, but so was the execution of Admiral Byng; I suppose Patel thinks it’s necessary to send a message, “Pour encourager les autres”.

*

They were wrong,” Captain Gray said. “It’s a universal disgust. Everyone in Greenwich Police Dept is disgusted. Your emotions are real. I respect that.”

Protesters demanded that the entire police department leave the building and face them.

“Our officers aren’t all in the building. They’re out serving. They’re on the road,” Chief Heavey explained.

“Bring them out,” the crowd shouted.

UPDATE: From a reader:

“The only reason law enforcement should be taking a knee is to improve their shooting position.”

Heh.

Sales Reported

/

111 Conyers Farm Drive, $15.550 million. Asked for $18.995, but close enough. 87 days on market. Buyers’ Zip is 32082, Ponte Verda Beach, which, I’m told by a reliable source (well, Google) is in Florida.

Quail Road

34 Quail Road, price war! Asked for $5.495 million, got $5.650. Lower Manhatan (10013) buyers.

7 Robin Place, Havemeyer. Full price, $3.395 million, 28 days on market. Riverside buyers.

Why do our compassionate liberal friends ruin every city they occupy?

/

(ChatGpd photo)

Not very long ago, Portland Maine was a clean, safe little city of 60,000 souls, with beautiful parks, a vibrant commercial waterfront and some great restaurants. All that beauty attracted young people and middle-aged yuppies from Boston, and they promptly set about remaking the city into their image of a liberal/socialist paradise. They succeeded only partly: liberal/socialist, yes; paradise, no.

Here’s the latest dispatch from the battlefield:

Portland’s Monument Square in Crisis: Business Owners, Residents Demand City Action on Homelessness and Rampant Drug Use

Portland residents and business owners are speaking out and asking the City Council for help to address what they say are unsafe and obstructive conditions in Monument Square caused by the presence of homeless people and drug users.

A letter to Portland Mayor Mark Dion from David Turin, the owner of David’s Restaurant [one of the best, and priciest restaurants in Portland — Ed] in Monument Square, was read during the public comment portion at the City Council’s Monday meeting.

“Monument Square has become an unsafe place to work or visit, and has become a hostile and expensive environment in which to operate a restaurant,” Turin wrote.

[RELATED: Restorative Justice: Homeless Man, Previously Charged with Portland Machete and Knife Attacks, Arrested Again for Assault, Burglary…]

Turin, who was not himself present at the meeting but had his letter read for the Council by a friend on his behalf, wrote that his employees have had their cars broken into six times in the last month, and have seen over a hundred instances both of littering and open drug use in front of his restaurant.

“Dining guests and staff are frequently abused and sometimes threatened,” Turin wrote. “We have had our front windows smashed twice in two years.”

“The square has long been a desirable destination for strolling, sitting outside, shopping, doing business and dining — now it looks like an encampment of some kind,” he wrote.

Turin said that the homelessness issue in the square is an “existential crisis and threat” to his business and other businesses in the area. “Please help us,” he ends his letter.

Ari Gerson, owner of Longfellow Books near Monument Square, also spoke on the issue of homelessness and public safety in the area during the Monday City Council meeting.

“Over the past year, we’ve seen a sharp increase in drug use, aggressive panhandling, and confrontational behavior right outside our front doors,” Gerson told the Council.

“We’ve found needles and drug paraphernalia in the planters and the sidewalk cracks,” Gerson said. “There are people passed out, clearly in distress, and sometimes frightening episodes of shouting or violence that scares off customers, staff and even myself at times.”

[RELATED: Longtime Bayside Resident Says She was Victim of Brutal Mugging, Warns Women not to Walk Alone in Neighborhood…]

Several Monument Square neighborhood residents also spoke at the meeting and voiced similar concerns to the business owners.

“I have become frightened in my own neighborhood to go outside my own door, and to face the things that we are facing at this point,” one female resident said.

“Almost everyday when I leave my house I have to knock on my door, because someone is using in front of my door,” another woman said. “I’ve come home often to defecation or urine on the ground outside of my house.”

“When you call the police, they come, but it’s hard to offer any help,” she said.

“When I go home, or try to leave, and I have to wake somebody up or move them to get in or out of my front door, that’s not very comfortable,” another woman said.

Several of the speakers called for increased police presence and intervention in the Monument Square area, as well as for the city to direct more resources into shelters and support services for the homeless.

Unrelated, sort of, because the Somalians imported into the city are only a small part of the problem, but they certainly haven’t improved things:

Welfare fraud

/

“I have this great idea …”

Stephen Green, PJMedia:

This California Dem Wants to Legalize $25K Welfare Fraud

Lola Smallwood-Cuevas … recently surveyed the rubble of her Los Angeles County district and said to herself, "I know just how to make this rubble bounce."

Smallwood-Cuevas just introduced SB560, also known as the Legalized Welfare Fraud Bill, or at least it should be. According to L.A.-based Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin, SB560 "would decriminalize welfare fraud below an amount of $25,000."

What's stealing a measly $24,999 among friends? Honestly, it could happen to anyone, and, if SB560 becomes law, it probably will. 

If I'm being completely honest, almost anyone could have come up with legalizing five-figure welfare fraud. But Smallwood-Cuevas is a particularly hardworking and creative Democrat, so she didn't end things there. Under SB560, prosecutions for attempted welfare fraud would be prohibited, and it would also become illegal to prosecute someone for perjury if they accidentally got charged for welfare fraud and then lied to prosecutors about it.

"Sorry you didn't get away with your welfare fraud this time, Bucko, but that was a real nice story you made up and better luck next time," isn't how DAs approach these things in the rest of the country, but this is California we're talking about.

SB560 essentially provides one of those personal force fields from "Dune" to protect welfare cheats from pretty much anything except for slow-moving knives and laser blasts. Not that I'm advocating stabbing or laser-blasting welfare cheats. Or at least not yet.

Not to be outdone, Assemblyman Nick Schultz and his fellow Democrats on the Public Safety Committee this week blocked "a proposal that would make it a felony to purchase 16 and 17-year-old children for sex."

You have to ask yourself, "Why?" Why would Democrats proactively encourage welfare cheats and even would-be welfare cheats? Why would they block a bill making it a felony to traffic a 16-year-old girl for sex?

I already told you. If there's a way to legalize or incentivize bad behavior, they will find it. And if they control a legislature in large enough numbers, they will enact it and award themselves bonus points for absurdity or being just plain wrong.

It can't be easy always finding creative new ways to make things worse, and yet they never struggle to find fresh faces like Lola Smallwood-Cuevas or Nick Schultz to blaze those trails to societal suicide.

They're the hardest-working people in politics.

(I certainly trust Stephen Green to get his facts right, but I still went to the original source, the proposed bill itself. Green has described it accurately.)

Don't let the door ...

/

Woke DOJ Lawyers Self-Deport After Being Told They Have to Protect Religious Liberties

Virginia Taft:

How is it that the woke lawyers always end up working in government or law schools? 

Law schools keep cranking out entitled, leftist, wannabe lawyers who are unabashedly woke, irrespective of the law. And somehow those ideologues end up as government lawyers. Goodness knows the DOJ was full of those lawyers starting with the Obama administration and through the Biden no-hold-barred attacks on civil liberties. Trump 45 never had a chance.

Trump 47's new civil rights division chief at the Justice Department, Harmeet Dhillon, now knows the depth of the problem, and her changes at the division have caused an immediate backlash. #Resistance lives, but this time they're self-deporting from the government without much of a fight. Being paid off will do that to some people. 

Since taking on this job two weeks ago, Dhillon has re-directed the civil rights division’s targets for prosecution. She told attorneys in a memo last week that, from now on, woke ideology is out and the rule of law is in. She put the civil rights division on footing to protect civil rights and told lawyers they would target antisemitism, anti-Christian discrimination, and dismantle the notoriously racist diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and to "govern yourself accordingly." 

And then 100 or more of the 340 lawyer civil rights division took a buy out package that goes through September. 

Dhillon told Blaze TV's Glenn Beck that "no one has been fired by me since I came." 

"And en masse, dozens and now over 100 attorneys decided they’d rather not do what the job requires them to do and I think that’s fine because we don’t want people in the federal government who feel like it’s their pet project to go persecute, you know, police departments based on statistical evidence, or persecute people praying outside abortion facilities instead of doing violence," she told Beck. She continued, "That’s not the job here. The job here is to enforce the federal civil rights laws, not woke ideology." 

She told him they'll need to replace a lot of those lawyers who left because "I have a very robust affirmative civil rights agenda that I think many Americans will be pleased with." 

….

[S]he says she's done "persecuting" people for peaceful protesting outside abortion clinics, for example. The civil rights division will target actual violence, she vows. And that includes firebombing pregnancy resource clinics that offer help—and not baby-killing surgery—to women who choose to keep their babies.

There have been more than 200 such fire bombings of crisis pregnancy clinics in the past few years. 

The DOJ civil rights division has been DOGE'd without doing anything other than prioritizing actual law-breaking in their lawsuits. The bad hombres of Wokeville have left by their own choice. 

As many as 75,000 government employees have taken buyouts to leave government jobs so far during Trump 47. Another estimated 121,000 people have lost their jobs due to reductions in force. 

That's a lot of taxpayer savings for the first 100 days.