# data[].attributes.body
This was an amendment to the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This act went against many English-only policies at the state level. This act is important because it made bilingual education programs a part of federal policy. This then allowed for the authorization of federal funding for bilingual education. It also helped not only Spanish speaking students, but also any student who didn't speak English as their first language.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a Supreme Court case that was between the Chinese-speaking students and the San Francisco School District in 1970. This case examined if non-English speaking student could receive equal educational opportunities when they were taught in a language that they didn't fully understand. The SCOTUS decided that this school district was not providing equal educational opportunities and said it violated both the equal protection clause within the 14th Amendment, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Because there was no way to get a "meaningful education" for the students because there is no "equality of treatment" due to classroom materials being in a language that students didn't understand. This is important because it effectively outlawed English mainstreaming of ELLs. It also brought about Lau remedies, which were created by the Office of Civil Rights, to help districts meet the needs of ELLs.

# data[].attributes.body
Proposition 227 was California's response to the "English for the Children" initiative. Proposition 227 was illustrated as a way to improve ELL instruction by outlawing bilingual education in the state. This was because it was seen as more efficient to prepare students for future economic and employment opportunities by teaching children English in English only. For the requirements of the law to be met sheltered English-immersion programs were created to meet student needs. This proposition was approved by voters by a margin of 61% to 39%, analysis shows that Latino residents were overwhelmingly against this proposition. This is significant because it acted as a launching point for more "English for the Children" initiatives in Arizona and Massachusetts. These initiatives that passed in these two states were even more harsh on bilingual education than Proposition 227.

# data[].attributes.body
This court case pertains to the No Child Left Behind Act, where it specifies that students should be tested in a "valid and reliable" manner. The argument from the Coachella Valley CSD was that their ELLs were not being tested properly because they weren't being provided the proper accommodations for testing of their translated tests or tests in simplified English. The court ruled in favor of California, and an appeal was filed by Coachella Valley. This is significant because it highlights that people were finding issues with NCLB for ELLs. These shortcomings would be improved with the later Every Student Succeeds Act, but some would remain like being reliant on testing for accountability.

# data[].attributes.headline
2015 - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

# data[].attributes.subject
2015 - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

# data[].attributes.body
This act was signed into law by President Obama. This act tried to rectify some of the issues of the Not Child Left Behind Act, but offering states more flexibility for goal setting and choosing how to step in at low-performing schools. There was however an additional requirement for schools to track subgroups of student's progress. This act is significant because it allowed states to have greater flexibility to set achievement goals for their bilingual education programs, and now they were able to use multiple measures to assess ELLs. However accountability is still accounted for through testing of both content and English language proficiency testing.