Federal court upholds California's ban on bilingual education

A federal appeals court today upheld the constitutionality of Proposition 227, removing one of the last legal obstacles to California’s voter- approved ban on bilingual education in public schools.

Opponents, however, vowed to continue their fight school district by school district. In a unanimous three-judge ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to the 1998 law, finding that civil rights groups had failed to present any “evidence that Proposition 227 was enacted for discriminatory purposes.” The court upheld a similar ruling four years ago by a San Francisco federal judge who declined to block enforcement of the initiative. The ruling was the latest setback for foes of the controversial law, which essentially ended bilingual education for the majority of the 1.5 million students in the state who speak little or no English. Opponents indicated that they are likely to ask the 9th Circuit to reconsider the ruling with an 11-judge panel.

In addition, foes of Proposition 227 said there are likely to be continued lawsuits over the way the law is being applied in school districts around California, despite the failure of broader legal challenge.

“The devil will be in the implementation details,” said Thomas Saenz, attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Los Angeles.

Proposition 227 supporters praised the decision, and expressed hope that the legal wrangling will come to an end.

“This measure is about equality,” said Sharon Browne, an attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento. “Parents want a results- oriented program that provides the best education possible for their children and all of California’s students.”

The 9th Circuit’s decision was not unexpected. The same court in 1998 refused to block Proposition 227 from going into effect. The challenge to the law alleged that it unfairly targeted minority students, particularly Latinos, violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

In Monday’s ruling, Judge Wallace Tashima, writing for the appeals court, said that the abolition of bilingual education was not motivated by racial factors. Instead, the ruling found, it was to “improve what proponents viewed to be a pedagogically flawed educational system.”

Under Proposition 227, students can remain in bilingual education if parents, teachers and school administrators agree it is best and obtain a waiver that places the students in a bilingual program. Courts have rejected efforts by school districts to obtain blanket waivers under the law.

Contact Howard Mintz at (408) 286-0236 or [email protected].



Comments are closed.