This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: In Lau v. Nichols , 414 U.S. 563 (1974), parents of Chinese-speaking students argued that the San Francisco Unified School District's failure to provide equal educational opportunities for children who did not speak English amounted to a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. There were in fact two groups of children who brought this action: (1) 1,790 Chinese-American school children who spoke no English and were taught none, and (2) 1,066 Chinese-American school children who spoke no English but received some remedial instruction in English. According to Ninth Circuit Judge (Shirley) Hufstedler, plaintiffs did not seek to have their classes taught in both English and Chinese. "All they ask is that they receive instruction in the English language." (Lau v. Nichols, 1997) Because the funds are limited, it is hard for a school to provide educational opportunities. School district can only do so much with different speaking languages other than the English language. I do believe this child and other children deserve equal education rights, and the school language....
View Full Document
- Spring '11