# data[].attributes.body
The Meyer vs. Nebraska case comes from a concern of a school teacher teaching a foreign language outside of school hours. It's original ruling determined that teaching a language other than English was seen as, "foreign to the best interests of the United States" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 184). By overturning the rule, it painted a picture that forced monolingualism should not be an interest of the people of the United States. Although this did not play a part in creating bilingual education programs, it did take part in the creating the mindset needed for future advocates of bilingual education.

References

Baker, C., & Wright, W. (2021). Foundations of Bilingual Education and (7th ed.). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Meyer v. Nebraska and the struggle for bilingual education 1923 – The Latinx Almanac

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On May 25, 1920, schoolteacher Robert T. Meyer taught one of his fourth-grade pupils to read the Bible in the German language. (There goes the neighborhood!) An attorney from Hamilton County learned of the highly subversive incident, and charged the teacher with shockingly violating a Nebraska law that prohibited teaching foreign languages to elementary school pupils. Meyer was tried, convicted, and fined $25. Meyer appealed his conviction. In 1923, the US Supreme Court ruled in Meyer v. Nebraska that the 1919 Nebraska law violated the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
El 25 de mayo de 1920, el maestro de escuela Robert T. Meyer enseñó a uno de sus alumnos de cuarto grado a leer la Biblia en idioma alemán. Un abogado del condado de Hamilton se enteró del incidente subversivo y acusó al maestro de violar escandalosamente una ley de Nebraska que prohibía enseñar idiomas extranjeros a los alumnos de la escuela primaria. Meyer fue juzgado, condenado y multado con 25 dólares. (Parece que el abogado tenía demasiado tiempo libre). Meyer apeló su condena. En 1923, la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos dictaminó en Meyer v. Nebraska que la ley de Nebraska de 1919 violaba la cláusula del debido proceso de la Decimocuarta Enmienda.

# data[].attributes.body
During the era of Sputnik, politicians were led and motivated to increase education in all departments, including language, which in turn, "helped to create a slightly more soul-searching attitude to languages other than English..." (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 184). Again, although this did not lead directly to the creation or immersion of bilingual education programs, it took part in creating a foundational mindset among people in power about the importance of languages other than English. A shift in attitude supporting multilingualism furthered with this Act.

References

Baker, C., & Wright, W. (2021). Foundations of Bilingual Education and (7th ed.). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

# data[].attributes.headline
Title VII of the ESEA, the Bilingual Education Act (1968)

# data[].attributes.subject
Title VII of the ESEA, the Bilingual Education Act (1968)

# data[].attributes.body
This amendment, "indicated that bilingual education programs were to be seen as part of federal education policy.." and "authorized the use of federal funds for the education of speakers of languages other than English" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 185). This legislation acknowledged and supported the educational needs of non-English speaking students. Specifically in this legislation, only the federal government support is seen. There is no state or local obligation to offer bilingual programs just yet. But due to attention and support given to bilingual education by the federal government, a new movement of state policy would soon follow after this.

References

Baker, C., & Wright, W. (2021). Foundations of Bilingual Education and (7th ed.). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

# data[].attributes.body
The Lau vs. Nichols concerned whether Chinese-speaking students were receiving equal education, in terms of them receiving an education in which they can understand. The case determined that the school had violated the rights of these students to a fair, understandable, and achievable education. Although the case was rejected by the federal court, it was accepted by the US Supreme Court. Now, schools are obligated to offer an education that overcomes language barriers. This case also led to "Lau Remedies" which is another crucial stepping stone for bilingual education.

# data[].attributes.body
Following Lau vs. Nichols, this policy was a mandated guideline for all schools to protect and nurture the education of non-English speaking students. Schools are now obligated to offer bilingual programs in their schools and ESL classes to provide meaningful learning for all students. This is a crucial step forward in the bilingual education world. Students who do not speak English, who were once marginalized and looked over, now have the rights just as everyone to receive a meaningful education.