# data[].attributes.body
Brown vs Board of Education ruled that all students have equal protection under the law. The original ruling was a reaction to segration in schools based on race from the "Jim Crow" era, where students were separated based on their race with students of color often receiving a lesser educuation. The ruling led to the desegregation of school throughout the US.

Since the ruling, Brown vs Board of Education has set the standard for fighting discrimination including race, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation and language through out schools in the US. As a result multilingual learners (MLs) have certainly benefitted from this ruling; they are not equally protected under the law if they cannot linguistically access lessons. There are, however, many ways to interpret this ruling in a linguistic sense that can still lead to a English only, similationist point of view that does not necesaily support MLs best interests.

# data[].attributes.body
IQ tests in English were previously used to assess if a students had a disability, and so when an ML took the test, their lack of knowledge in English led them to be put into the Special Education category. This classification allowed them certain recognition that they might not have otherwise received, but it also essentially misclassifies them in a fundamental way. Not knowing a language is not a disability; in fact students are able to learn a language until they are known as a "former English Language Learner", while students who have learning disabilities are not able to test out of this classification. As a result, MLs did not improve with the same support given to students with disabilities.

Diana Vs. Board of Education changed this standard when an ML challenged her low IQ and later tested much higher when she was able to complete the test in her home language. The resulting lawsuit ended the practice of using IQ tests to assess MLs. At face level this disproved a popular idea that MLs were naturally less intelligent by nature, not because they were not equipt to meet the lingustic challenges of the test. Finally, as a result of this lawsuit, MLs could receive support that was meaningful to them, and not be put into a category that did not help them grow.

# data[].attributes.headline
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Revisions of 1997

# data[].attributes.subject
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Revisions of 1997

# data[].attributes.body
If Diana Vs. Board of Education underlined that MLs are not automaticcaly Special Education students by giving a ML a test in her home language, IDEA Revisions of 1997 takes that concept and applies it more universally. IDEA requires consent materials for parents be provided in their home language so they can fully understand what they are agreeing to, and that certain evaluations also be offered in students language as to not discriminate against they culture or race.

Here we can see the timeline of accessibility for MLs. Each step forward outwardly demonstrates the acceptance that MLs can show their knowledge completely and that they are not naturally less intelligent, and that the use of home language does not hinder language acquisition but can support them and participate better in their school community.

# data[].attributes.body
A year after No Child Left Behind (NCLB) first became law, Title III was added to it. Previous to this MLs were assessed the same as any other student, putting them at an obvious disadvantage by giving them a test they could not access due to their English level. Title III added assessments meant to track their linguistic progress rather than their progress along content areas by testing reading, writing, speaking and listenings skills. When they skills were assessed, it meant that it was alos possible to set objectives for their progress from year to year.

While testing MLs on content objectives in English does not provide a school with revelant and helpful data, assessing MLs on their English skills can be a use to them. This way data is collected on how they are progressing, and that data also allows school to plan interventions and support, then assess how productive they have been.

# data[].attributes.body
Proposition 58 resinds the previous Proposition 227 from 1998 which was the first law in the US that backed up the "English Only" mentally that was so popular at the time. Under Proposition 58 Dual Language Bilingualism became a popular form of using home language in the classroom, deomstrating how much public opinion can change in less than 20 years.

MLs live multiple benefits of being able to use their home language in the class room. They are better able to access content objectives and while still working on improving their English language skills. In addition to this, MLs have proof that they home language is valid and important, and whe nany student sees themself in their education they are more likely to be present for it. Proposition 58 also unwitting helped monolingual English speakers in learning a new language that could be important on a global scale.