In 1988, as a result of a general election, Arizona added Article XXVIII to its constitution, Article XXVIII provided that English was to be the official language of the state and required all state officials and employees to use only the English language during the performance of government business. Maria-Kelly, an employee of the Arizona Department of Administration, frequently spoke in Spanish to Spanish-speaking persons with whom she dealt in the course of her work. Maria claimed that Article XXVIII violated constitutionally protected free speech rights and brought an action in federal court against the state governor, Rose Mofford, and other state officials. Does Article XXVIII violate the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution

Yes.  Article XXVIII  of the Arizona constitution is a violation of Maria-Kelly's freedom of speech as enshrined in the first amendment to the US Constitution.

Explanation:

The first amendment to the constitution guarantees Maria-Kelly freedom of speech.  Therefore, to force Maria-Kelly not to speak Spanish to some Spanish-speaking persons with whom she dealt in the course of her work is an abridgment of her right to self-expression.  Conclusively, Article XXVIII clearly violated her constitutionally protected free speech rights.

"quid pro quo" harassment takes place when a supervisor requires sex, sexual favors, or sexual contact from an employee/job candidate as a condition of their employment. only supervisors who have the authority to make tangible employment actions (i.e. hire, fire, promote, can commit "quid pro quo" harassment.

who knows? not you apparently