ipl-logo

Lau V Nichols Case Summary

665 Words3 Pages

Title of Case: Lau v. Nichols: 414 US 563 (1974) Plaintiff: Kinney Kinmon Lau Defendant: Alan Nichols, San Francisco Unified School District Setting: San Francisco, CA Major Issues Raised/What is the case about? This case examines the responsibility that a school district has to establish a program that deals with the various language issues of non-English speaking students. Kinney Lau and other non-English speaking students brought forth a lawsuit trying to force the San Francisco Unifed School District (SFUSD) to provide support for all non-English-speaking Chinese students with a bilingual education program so they could proficiently learn English. The case also attaches “strings” to school districts that receive federal financial assiatance. …show more content…

The Ninth Court also stated no constitutional nor statutory mandate existed requiring the SFUSD to provide remedial programs to students that met the qualification of being disadvantaged. However, the Supreme Court eventually stepped in. Because of the public importance of the issue in Lau v. Nichols, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. This meant the lower courts had to send all information involving the case to the Supreme Court. Then, the Supreme Court took over the case. Since the students couldn’t read or speak English proficiently, the Supreme Court ruled the SFUSD had in fact denied them their right to equal educational opportunities that were afforded to them under Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 601 was the sole basis for the Supreme Court ruling in favor of the students of the SFUSD. Section 601 states individuals may not be discriminated against based on race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) clarified Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. HEW issued guidelines for school districts to give students of a certain race, color, or national origin an opportunity to achieve the same education …show more content…

Nichols affected state and federal directives regarding what a school district must do in order to afford every student equal educational opportunities. So, after the Lau ruling by the Supreme Court, Congress created the Equal Educational Opportunity Act (EEOA) of 1974 and the Bilingual Education Act of 1974. Lau v. Nichols reaffirmed the rights of non-English speaking students the opportunity to receive a free and equal education. It also reaffirmed that non-English-speaking students were to be free from discriminatory practices in educational programs and services that were afforded to other students. Although Lau v. Nichols had a positive impact on the education of non-English-speaking students, the Supreme Court stopped short of making revisions that would force school district to reexamine the school board’s illegal practices. The Supreme Court didn’t give the SFUSD a clear directive regarding provisions of specific programs that would satisfy Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This shortcoming keeps the debate alive as to whether or not appropriate programs for non-English-speaking students have been implemented correctly throughout the Unites States. Discussions are still prevalent in school districts, state legislatures, and

Show More
Related
85 Words | 1 Pages

“The 1970 OCR memorandum and the Lau V. Nichols Supreme Court decision led to expansion of Title VI enforcement under the Ford and Carter administrations” (Ovando 79). The 1975 Lau Remedies provided the United States office for Civil Rights guidelines for compliance. These guidelines provided ideas for identifying language minority students and assessing their English proficiency, determining appropriate instructions, deciding their grade level, and determining the standards of teachers. The Lau Remedies created a background to develop and implement bilingual language wherever it is possible.

Read More
155 Words | 1 Pages

In Doe v. Koger, a student with intellectual disabilities was expelled based on disciplinary issues. The school denied the student a due-process hearing for students with disabilities. When the family took the school district to court, it was ruled that before changing the placement of a student with disabilities through long term suspension or expulsion, a hearing must be held to determine whether the child’s inappropriate behavior was a result, or manifestation of his/her disability. Doe v. Kroger was a monumental court case in the history of special education because it determined that students with disabilities can in fact be suspended or expelled as a disciplinary measure, but only after a manifestation determination has taken place

Read More
173 Words | 1 Pages

The supreme court agreed with the students but their were some restrictions on their rights. Schools had the

Read More
1170 Words | 5 Pages

Notаbly absent from the opinion, as it was in Plessy, is any citаtion to a Supreme Court cаse that considered whether the prаctice of segregating schools was a violation of the Fourteenth Аmendment. It was an open question for the Court. The Court аdmitted that the precedent to which it cited involved discriminаtion between whites and blacks rаther thаn other rаces. However, the Court found no аppreciable difference here—"the decision is within the discretion of the state in regulating its public schools, and does not conflict with the Fourteenth Аmendment."

Read More
395 Words | 2 Pages

The case was taken to the lower court, the U.S. Court of Appeals where the favor was given to the school board and not the students. The case was later than sent to the Supreme

Read More
765 Words | 4 Pages

The case showed the education system did not meet the standard of equality from the 14th Amendment. Where from my point of view the court made up the positions on both sides and ruled it without any precedent. Moreover, the ruling itself already imply our society is full of unfairness and the tendency of people will be segregated, thus create hate between groups. Also, the court back then seems to be only choosing from two options, where the first was the society model before 1954, which is segregation and race hierarchy existed and sanctified by law. The groups can both operate separately and unequally; on the other hand, there was the model where were decided in 1954 in which there will only be one cultural style, the society will become a melting pot and combine different cultures into one set of universal

Read More
1548 Words | 7 Pages

The court case Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education identified that schools in Louisville, Kentucky were using voluntary integration plans in their public schools (Smith, 2008, p. 303). The main complaint was filed by a white mother who wanted her child to be transferred to a kindergarten in a school closer to home. Her complaint to the schools was denied because of the need to keep the color ratio matched to the racial guidelines (Greenhouse, 2007). Many other complaints similar to this one existed as well since many parents were concerned about the distance their children had to ride to school and how long it was taking. The Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 case was brought to court by a nonprofit created by parents in order to fight the school assignment plans used in the schools of Seattle.

Read More
1662 Words | 7 Pages

The Mendez et al V. Westminster Board of Education came into effect when Gonzalo Mendez’s children were denied the acceptance of registering at Westminster Main School in Westminster, California; the school district where his children belonged. His sister Soledad Vidaurri went to register her children and Mendez’s 3 children at Westminster Main School. Mendez’s children were denied the right to attend an “all white” school because of their race and dark colored skin. They were told to attend Hoover school where only Mexicans attended. Soledad’s children were accepted into the school because their skin color was light and their last name came from French descendents.

Read More
50 Words | 1 Pages

In 1950’s many lawsuits were filed in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware and the District of Columbia on the same struggle of African American elementary school students who attended segregated schools. Despite differing somewhat in the details, all alleged a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

Read More
1603 Words | 7 Pages

The courts ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in this case. It was determined that “all children in the District of Columbia have a right to free public education, and that those with disabilities should be thoroughly reviewed and placed in appropriate programs” (Weebly, n.d.). This case was significant because it highlighted that all children, even those with disabilities such as emotional disturbance, “have the right to a public education that accounts for their needs and abilities. This case helped pave the road to The Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EHC) of 1975, federal legislation that was enacted to protect this right” (Weebly,

Read More
529 Words | 3 Pages

I believe this was an important step to take but more could be done in this area, especially in rural areas where there are predominantly English speaking students. Many schools don 't have the proper resources to handle students who cannot speak or understand proper

Read More
759 Words | 4 Pages

These decisions also made it so job discrimination in federally funded programs were not allowed. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a resolution that changed the way students went to school. At the end of the Brown v. Board of Education case, the Supreme Court said that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" (Morrison 19). Chief Justice Earl Warren said, "We conclude that in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place" (Somervill

Read More
1431 Words | 6 Pages

A. DISTRICT PHILOSOPHY After the federal government, I the no Child Left Behind Act, recognized English learners and defined students as “those whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language …” the different states and districts in the nation created their plans to identify and serve EL students (Wright 3). The LAUSD district promotes cultural diversity and acknowledges the educational needs of the different communities that encompass all ethnic and linguistic groups in Los Angeles. The master plan was created to help English learners in LAUSD to acquire the English language and at the same time succeed academically. Their goal is “to build on that rich heritage and expand upon it to ensure that

Read More
1069 Words | 5 Pages

The Consent Decree (also known as the META or ESOL Consent Decree) of 1990 is Florida’s framework for compliance with federal and state laws and jurisprudence regarding the education of English Language Learners (ELLs) (Govoni & Palaez, 2011). The Florida ESOL Consent Decree came about when the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), along with other civil rights/educational community organizations, decided to sue the Florida State Board of Education. The organizations were fighting for equal educational opportunity for all students, regardless of the individual’s primary language. Students in English for Speakers of Other Language (ESOL) program were not receiving an education that met their cognitive level because teachers in most schools were not properly trained to give ELL students an appropriate education. Teachers lacked the training to facilitate equal opportunity to the students.

Read More
1810 Words | 8 Pages

As Americans, we view the Constitution as a stepping stone to making the great country we live in today. Yet, we the people of the United States failed to realize another component in order to form a perfect union. Which is to establish and promote equal opportunities for a quality education for all. However, we live in a society where social locators such as class, gender, and race are huge factors in the determination of one’s educational future.

Read More

More about Lau V Nichols Case Summary

Open Document