Lau V Nichols Case Summary

2. You are a new principal and are setting up interviews for a vacant position at your school. You will have an interview team comprised of 3 teachers, a parent and a board/ LSC member. You want to be sure they understand what questions can be asked of prospective employees and what is prohibited from being asked. You are working on the guidelines you will go through with the team regarding appropriate and inappropriate questions.

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."

Therefore, the issue pertaining to students with learning disabilities was thrown out in relation to this particular case. • The state Supreme Court, in addressing the ill fitting correlation drawn in Stamos’ citation of Bell v. Lone Oak Independent School District as an explanation of how students have a fundamental right to participate in extracurricular activities, stated that correlations between the fundamental right of marriage and this case could not be aligned. • The state Supreme Court also stated that due to the facts the rule did not infringe upon any fundamental rights nor did it create/burden a suspect class, that it did not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Texas Constitution. • Citing Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577-78, 92 S. Ct. 2709

“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.

Although the roots of this movement date as far back as the 1900s, the legacy of the African American’s role in World War II sparked the catalyst needed to promote the legislation that eventually led to their equality. “On May 17, 1954, The Supreme Court announced its decision in the case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka” (Brinkley 772). This regulation overturned the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in the Plessy V Ferguson case. The separate but equal doctrine was a prime example of domestic policy that did not uphold the government’s constitutional promise to promote the general welfare of society-to include all that fall under the definition of an American citizen. The affliction put on children who had to travel to segregated public schools placed an unequal burden and damage done to those who it pertained to.

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.

Gathercoal (2001) reminds school leaders that the Supreme Court has upheld schools may limit an individual’s right to an education if they violate one of four underlying responsibilities. Students right to an education can be limited if they willfully cause property loss or damage. They must follow rules which have a legitimate educational purpose. Students rights can also be limited if they pose a health and safety risk to themselves or others. Finally students may not cause a serious disruption to the educational process.

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

Since the late 1950s, when the case for African American rights to receive the same education as their graduates began and ended, or so we thought. Schools today still remain widely segregated throughout the U.S. nation. In 1954 in Topeka, Kansas, the supreme court began to review many cases dealing with segregation in public education. Oliver Brown was one who went against the supreme court for not only his daughter, but for many other African American children to receive equal education in the ray of society. The Brown v. Board of Education case marked the end of racial discrimination in public schools which impacted African Americans to get an equal education in the American society.

The goal of the suit against the Board of Education was getting equal access to educational rights within the school system. Unable to enroll in the all white schools, due to their race, the family filed suit on February 28, 1951 against the Board of Education within Kansas Supreme Court. They lost the court case in the Kansas Court, but quickly appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court. When the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, five cases were brought together to form Brown v Board of Education, “…Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs v. Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward Country (VA), Boiling v. Sharpe, and Gebhart v. Ethel… facts of each case are different, the main issue in each was the constitutionality of state-sponsored segregation in public schools” (U.S Court). Through the hearing, the subject of separate but equal was finally being

er Awad Professor Muse SCMA 323: Business Law November 16, 2016 Brown vs. Board of Education: School Desegregation Brown vs Board of Education was one of the biggest cases ever brought upon the Supreme Court and on May 17, 1954, it was unanimously ruled that the segregation of races within public schools was unconstitutional. In fact, at the time of the case, over thirty three percent of public schools were lawfully segregated by race and the court had to decide between the racism within the United States. Dating back to the Civil War time, the United States declared its independence from England with a document known as the Deceleration of Independence; in this document it is stated “all men are created equal,” and this was definitely not

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

INTRODUCTION “We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place.” -Chief Justice Earl Warren Separate But Equal, directed by George Stevens Jr, is an American made-for-television movie that is based on the landmark Brown v. Board of Directors case of the U.S. Supreme court which established that segregation of primary schools based on race, as dictated by the ‘Separate but Equal’ doctrine, was unconstitutional based on the reinterpretation of the 14th amendment and thus, put an end to state-sponsored segregation in the US. Aims and Objectives:

Americans, when they think of Civil Rights probably think of the Civil Rights Movement. During the civil rights era African Americans fought to be treated as equals by fighting segregated schools, for their voting rights, and for their basic right that every American has today. To say that education is our civil rights movement of today is inaccurate. Antonio Alvarez’s narrative “Out Of My Hands” focuses on a financially struggling family, but proving that they can succeed. David L. Kirp’s article “The Secret to Fixing Bad Schools” reinforces the idea that even though a community might be poor, that doesn’t have to reflect the quality of education students receive.

As school administrators encountered many issues in balancing between providing safe school environment and meeting the requirements of the new law, Many case laws had been established by the judicial decisions in particular cases such as Goss v. Lopez (1975), Stuart v. Nappi (1978), Doe v. Koger (1979), Jackson v. Franklin County School Board (1985), Honig v. Doe (1988) which clarified many discipline questions pertaining to special education. In 1997 Congress passed thorough amendment to the IDEA and embeded detailed statutes to address disciplinary issues of students with