The Supreme Court case of Lau v. Nichols; now called Lau v. San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD); is an argument on the basis on if SFUSD is required to provide a supplemental English language program in accordance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as using funds sent to the school system to implement this language program to ensure the language deficit gap is closed for students that speak languages other than English.
FACTS
In 1973, Kinney Kinmon Lau, represented by his mother Mrs. Kam Wai Lau, was one of approximately 1,800 out of 2,800 Chinese students of limited English ability, who believe that San Francisco Unified School District failed to provide English language instruction therefore denying the students from a “meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program”1 and therefore violated Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; banning discrimination based on “the ground of race, color, or national origin” in “any program receiving Federal financial assistance”2. The ruling was first denied by the court but the Court of
FACTS
In 1973, Kinney Kinmon Lau, represented by his mother Mrs. Kam Wai Lau, was one of approximately 1,800 out of 2,800 Chinese students of limited English ability, who believe that San Francisco Unified School District failed to provide English language instruction therefore denying the students from a “meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program”1 and therefore violated Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; banning discrimination based on “the ground of race, color, or national origin” in “any program receiving Federal financial assistance”2. The ruling was first denied by the court but the Court of