-
Plessy v. Ferguson
The basis of the case was to get rid of segregation by asking for both Black and White Americans to be able to share the same train cars. It was argued to have violated the 14th amendment. Despite this the supreme court decided that it was not discriminatory as it was not treating both parties as unequal but only separating them. Meaning they had access to the same things but were only separated meaning that it was not discrimination. This allowed for Jim Crow laws to continue onward. -
Brown v. the Board of Education, Topeka
The basis of the case was to eliminate segregation in schools the goal was to allow for children of both White and Black families to attend the same schools and have equal opportunities. It was argued that segregation within schools was violating the 14th amendment. The supreme court ruled that segregation within schools was unconstitutional. This allowed for students of both Black and White families to attend the same schools meaning they are going to gain an equal opportunity in education. -
Title IX
Title IX states that "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." This allowed for women to have more opportunities when it comes to their education. -
Lau v. Nichols
The case questioned whether or not it was fair for schools to teach exclusively in English whilst not providing non-English speakers with ways to learn the English language. It was argued that allowing schools to do this was discriminatory and in violation of the 14th amendment. The supreme court came to a unanimous decision that it was in fact unconstitutional. This allowed for it to mandatory that schools teach their preferred language. -
Education of all Handicapped Children Act
This allowed for handicapped children to be able to join classes with the mass majority as well as have IEPs (individualized education programs). This allowed for handicapped children to be able to have more opportunities for growth and allowed for more handicapped children to graduate and pursue a second education. Although it is not full proof and it still sometimes ignored by some institutions it is still a step forward. -
Plyler v. Doe
The case argued that undocumented children should be able to have access to free schooling. It argued that not allowing undocumented children to attend free schooling is a violation of the 14th amendment. This is due to it being out of the child's control they cannot be held accountable for their status as an undocumented citizen. It was ruled that it was unconstitutionally denying undocumented children from education. It only kept them at a disadvantage and will in turn keep them from growth. -
Serrano v. Priest
This case focused on the financing of schools and where the finances came from. At the time, schools were financed by their areas. It was noticed that schools from lower-income areas had fewer resources and fewer materials for students. It was argued that it was unfair to both students and staff. It declared that their way of funding was unconstitutional and declared that funding for schools should come from state funding rather than local funding. -
Pfeiffer v. Marion Center School Board
This case argued for equal opportunities for female students. Arlene Pfeiffer being dismissed from NHS due to her being pregnant caused for questioning of whether or not the dismissal was discriminatory. It was under holding due to the reasoning being sexual activity rather than gender but it was rejected due to a male student not being held to the same standard. Despite this the case was ultimately dismissed as it wasn't able to prove as a violation using Title IX. -
The No Child Left Behind Act
The No Child Left Behind Act was meant to improve school performance by holding schools accountable. It was meant to help close the achievement gap. This allowed for mandatory testing to ensure that students meet a "proficient" level of learning. Although meant to help, it caused schools to only focus on mandatory testing results rather than the student's understanding of the material taught.