Immigrants to the United States have played an important role in the implementation of laws and the overall reshaping of our government. With an ever increasing need to legally protect immigrants and an new and powerful uprising of civil right concerns, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was established to outlaw discrimination of all ethnic, religious, and racial groups. This Act was immediately implemented in schools, places of employment, government facilities and all public places. Almost ten years after the passing of this Act, the trial of Lau v. Nichols (1925) would bring about radical changes in the American educational system, creating a new structure where non-English speaking students would be given equal opportunity to obtain a quality education.
Case Details.
The case of Lau v. Nichols was heard by the Supreme Court in December of 1973. In this case, the plaintiff was Kinney Kinmon Lau, a Chinese-American student in the San Francisco School District, who, along with his guardian, argued that numerous Chinese-American students were being denied the opportunity to participate in the public educational system. These students were being taught by English speaking teachers, not those who spoke their language. The issue at hand was whether or not the rights of immigrant children and youth were being violated under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. .
Decision, Lau v. Nichols.
The Supreme Court unanimously favored Lau and found that, rather than violating the Equal Rights Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the actions by the San Francisco Unified School District had indeed violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VI regulates requirements and federal funding given to aid in the educational practices of English Language Learners throughout the country (Civil Rights Act of 1964). The Supreme Court stated that, in regards to students who do not understand English, "[t]here is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum " (Lau v.
