Landmark Legal

Cases Affecting
Students From
Linguistically
Diverse
Backgrounds
ED 434
Spring 2017

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Passed by Congress in 1964, signed into law by President
Johnson
Prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, gender,
color, religion, or national origin.
Outlawed public segregation of Black and White facilities
Discouraged school segregation

Title VI: No person in the United States shall, on the

ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination under any program or
activity receiving Federal financial assistance(Civil
Rights Act, 1964, sec. 601).

Resources:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-righ
ts-act-interesting-facts/
Garca, O., Kleifgen, J. A., & Falchi, L. (2008). From English
Language Learners to Emergent Bilinguals. Equity Matters.
Research Review No. 1. Campaign for Educational Equity,
Teachers College, Columbia University.

Effects for
Emergent
Bilinguals

Few direct immediate effects because it

was very difficult to enforce
Important role in paving the way for
support for emergent bilinguals and their
families in schools
(e.g., the ESEA act of 1968 included
Title VII- at least in name support for
bilingual education for the first time)

Keyes v School
District No.1 Denver,
Colorado (1973)

Keyes against the Parks Hill school board.

Families of both Latino and African American
students sued the school district because
the school officials acted intentionally to
create a racially segregated system.
The courts demanded that the families prove
that school officials had intentionally
created a policy that segregated its
students.
The courts concluded that the segregation
was indeed de jure, intentionally
segregated, and not just de facto,
unintentionally done.

Resource:
http://usedulaw.com/358-keyes-v-school-distric
t-no-1-denver-colorado.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYkCtqU
TwLw

Keyes v. Denver (1973)

Effects for
Emergent Bilinguals

Following the court ruling, school zoning

was changed in an attempt to
desegregate Denver schools.
Because of these new school zones and
because of the socio economic trends
of the american people, these school
zones essentially created more
segregation within the schools.
So now it is nearly impossible to
determine if segregation is being done
intentionally or if it is merely happening
because of other socio economic
changes happening in Denver.
It is more difficult for minority students to
sue for integrated public schools.
Delarissa and Cole

Lau vs. Nichols

(1974)

Student claimed they were being

discriminated against in violation of the
14th Amendment.
1st grader Lau was the first plaintiff to
argue that there was no equality of
treatment.
Parents argued that the SFUSD were not
teaching Chinese children academically.
Children were being educated but were
not grasping information due to language
barriers.

Ami and Denise

Effects for
Emergent
Bilinguals

The verdict concluded a vague interpretation of how to

enforce this into the schools.
Introduced the idea of bilingual education because that is
ultimately what parents were asking for.
Guarantees students a meaningful education no matter
what their language background is.
Paved the way for two way immersion programs for
bilingual students.
Spanish

References:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXhQrJ37gFE (
Links to an external site.)

http://www-tc.pbs.org/beyondbrown/brownpdfs/l

Mandarin
Korean
Cantonense

Start at 5 minutes :

Lau Remedies
(1975)

Specification of steps on how to remedy ELL

practices
Continually evolving and now is part of the
Office of Civil Rights Document read for
today
Provision of Bilingual education was revoked
in the 1980s
Source:
https://courses.fortlewis.edu/courses/10570/pages/week-2-resourceson-landmark-legal-cases?module_item_id=281262

Breanna and Caterina

Step 1: Identify students primary language and home language and the proficiency of each language
Step 2: Diagnostic measures to decide each students needs and teaching style needed to satisfy the needs
Step 3: Determine the program the student needs (Transitional Bilingual Education Program,
Bilingual/Bicultural Program, and/or Multilingual/Multicultural Program.)
Step 4: Show that required and elective programs are not discriminatory
Step 5: Show that students receive adequate instructions from qualified instructors at an adequate
student/teacher ratio.
Step 6: Show students are not isolated ((ESAA) and Title VI provide effective regulations)
Step 7: School district must notify parents of all school activities and notifications.
Step 8: Evaluation: Submit progress reports for the student at the beginning and end of the school year for
the first three years of plan implementation.
Source:http://web.stanford.edu/~hakuta/www/LAU/IAPolicy/IA3ExecLauRemedies.htm

Originated in Texas

Castaneda vs.
Pickard (1978)
Becca and Karina

Plaintiffs charged the Raymondville Independent

school district saying that the schools were
not meeting the needs of ELLs
The schools were failing to incorporate sufficient
bilingual programs
The school was also segregating students based
on ability and ethnicity
This sent out an implicit message that
discriminating against different
ethnicities was okay

The court came to a decision that schools must

go through a three-prong test that
determines whether or not the schools are
meeting Castaneda Standards:
Based on sound educational theory
Teachers are providing effective resources for

Castaneda vs.
Pickard
Effects on ELLs

Security for students to know that the

schools have a set of expectations they
must meet
More money will be spent on resources
for ELLs
Schools will more than likely hire bilingual
teachers/specialists

Sends a message to parents and other

students that ELLs are valued in the
school
The Castaneda Standards help to
desegregate schools and provides
access to extracurricular activities
Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casta%C3%B1eda_v._Pickard
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/landmark-court-rulings

Plyler vs. Doe

(1982)

Who: Tyler Independent School District and Texas

Legislature
Summary: In 1975, the Texas Legislature
authorized school districts to deny enrollment to
undocumented immigrants. Soon after the Tyler
Independent School District enforced a policy
making undocumented immigrants pay $1000 in
tuition annually. Shortly after, a group of students
from Mexico filed a lawsuit to challenge this policy.
The lawsuit was brought to the supreme court. A 54 vote fell in favor of the plaintiff's (students from
Mexico), claiming the policy violated the 14th
amendment.
By denying these children a basic education, we
deny them the ability to live within the structure of
our civic institutions, and foreclose any realistic
possibility that they will contribute in even the
smallest way to the progress of our Nation.

Effects of Plyler
vs. Doe (1982)
Students have access to
public education regardless
of their immigration or
natural born status.
Sources:
http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/PlylerVDoeSummary
.html
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/plyler-v-doe
-public-education-immigrant-students
https://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/lc/image/62/62540.jpg

Schools are prohibited from:

Inquiring about a student's immigration
status, including requiring
documentation of a student's legal
status at initial registration or at
any other time.
Making inquiries from a student or
his/her parents which may expose
their legal status.
Treating students disparately for
residency determination purposes
on the basis of their undocumented
status.
Emily and
Lizzie