Lau v. Nichols, the Ruling

Editor's Note: This entry summarizes the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Lau v. Nichols. This case is multifaceted. For a more complete explanation of the impact and significance of the case, please consult the entries listed under “See Also …” and the text o/Lau v. Nichols reproduced in Appendix C

In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in Lau v. Nichols. The Court ruled that Chinese-speaking students in San Francisco had a right to a better education than they were currently receiving, that the San Francisco Unified School District was responsible for providing them a more “meaningful” education, and that the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education had the authority to compel the San Francisco Unified School District to provide such a program. More than 30 years after this historic decision, it continues to be widely discussed by experts and stakeholders, many of whom believe that the promise of the Lau decision has not yet been fulfilled.

The U.S. Supreme Court has dealt only infrequently with issues of language and language policy. In its history, only a handful of cases involving language have been decided by the Court. This is hardly surprising given the overwhelming prevalence of English in U.S. society. With the exception of Spanish, which is spoken by more than 30 million Americans, few languages are likely to have a continuing effect on as many cities and regions of the country during this century. The language group involved in the Lau case was a group of Chinese-speaking students attending the San Francisco schools. At the beginning of the 21st century, Chinese is the second-largest language community in the United States, second only to Spanish.

This entry describes fundamental concepts and issues of the ruling, the significance of the case, and recent developments regarding the case.