-
Plessy vs. Ferguson
Plessy vs. Ferguson really cemented the roll-back of reforms for former slaves signified by the Reconstruction era by upholding the constitutionality of segregated, "separate but equal" facilities and schools. Plessy legalized the segregation of African-Americans, but also legions of Mexican-descent Spanish speaking citizens. -
Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka
This Supreme Court decision nullified Plessy and the Jim Crow laws that mandated segregated facilities for "whites" and "coloreds." While the case did not directly address the educational needs of developing English-language learners or Special Education students, the law's call for equality of opportunity sparked a number of legal cases that later advanced the rights of differently-situated scholars regarding access and the necessity for bilingual education. -
Bilingual Education Act
Signed into law by President Johnson, this act formally recognized the unique needs of English language learners and advocated for bilingual programs as a civil rights issue. For much of the 20th-century, bilingual education was defended as a parents' rights issue. This shift in federal policy reflected social changes in attitudes towards immigration, best educational practices, and cultural pride. -
Equal Educational Opportunities Act, or EEOA
This act applied to racial segregation in schools. Most notably, it also advocated for a bilingual classroom environment in ruling that educational opportunities cannot be denied by the schools' "failure...to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation." -
Serna vs Portales
New Mexico schools were compelled to create and fund bilingual programs to address the specialized instructional needs of Spanish-surnamed students based on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 barring discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. -
Yazzie/Martinez vs. the State of New Mexico
This decision profoundly impacts students who speak Spanish or an Indigenous language by mandating "linguistically and culturally-relevant" academic instruction. In 2019, the court further defined the State of New Mexico's educational obligations in emphasizing that, "defendants must comply with their duty to provide an adequate education and may not conserve financial resources at the expense of our constitutional resources."
