This was the first case that had to deal with race in schools. This is not directly bilingual education, but is the foundation of a lot of rulings that have to deal with bilingual education and equality in school. The court decided that schools could be separate but equal which set up future school situations to be unequal and harder for ELL students.
FARRINGTON V TOKUSHIGE
Hawaii tried to limit teaching of Chinese and Japanese culture and language in school. There was a loop hole where it was allowed to teach their native language at after school programs. This case focused on language rights, but also the parental rights because there was a lot of social discrimination against Chinese and Japanese people.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT V. SALVATIERRA, ALVAREZ V. LEMON GROVE, AND MÉNDEZ V. WESTMINSTER SCHOOL DISTRICT
Approx. January 1, 1930
This is three cases classified together. The first one was about the school arguing that it is necessary for segregation in schools to teach English. The other two cases had the same issue, but the court said that it was not beneficial to be separated and harmed ELLs English development.
STAINBACK V. MO HOCK KE KOK PO
During WW1 and WW2, there was a lot of discrimination against Germans and Japanese people. Foreign language classes of these languages dropped significantly. People feared that by teaching them, people would be disloyal to America. In this case, it is shown that foreign students have the right to learn their culture and language in school.
SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT V. RODRIGUEZ
This case was not directly about bilingual education, but related to almost every bilingual student. This case argued the fact that non white schools were getting less funding and support. This case is an example of a negative impact on ELLs because the court ruling stated that the right to an equal bilingual education was not an actual right.
LAU V. NICHOLS
This case was one of the most influential in bilingual education. It was about Chinese students that were given no aid when going to school. The school district did the "sink or swim" mentality which is not beneficial to ELLs. The court ruled that there needs to be aid for non English speakers.The EEOA act was created out of this.
SERNA V. PORTALES
In New Mexico, there was a majority white school that had an ELL program for the few students that needed it. The bilingual program at this school was not equal to the other programs and parents fought for equality. The court ruled that the program was inadequate and the school needed to recreate their bilingual program.
ASPIRA V. NEW YORK
Puerto Rican families argued that there needed to be transitional bilingual education for their children that were learning Spanish and English at the same time. The Aspira consent decree came out of this and is still used today.
RIOS V. REED
In this case, a district promised to have a bilingual education program. It was inadequate and it was also ESL based which varies a lot from bilingual education. The court ruled that there needs to be an adequate bilingual program.
GOMEZ V. ILLINOIS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
This case was about students being in inadequate programs again that were bilingual. The court ruled that the court can enforce EEOA on school districts. ELL students need to do more than just sit in a classroom without understanding anything.