The Supreme Court case Ambach v. Norwick in 1978 dealt with the constitutionality of a New York law that prohibited non-U.S. citizens from obtaining permanent certification as public school teachers unless they intended to become U.S. citizens within a specified time period. The plaintiffs, who were resident aliens not seeking citizenship, argued that this law violated their equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and infringed upon their First Amendment freedoms by forcing them to make an unwanted political statement through naturalization. However, the Supreme Court upheld the New York statute in a 5-4 decision stating that it was justified by two substantial state interests: preserving loyalty and allegiance among those responsible for shaping children's attitudes towards government and society; and ensuring educators' ability to work effectively with parents, community leaders, and elected officials - all roles which could be compromised if there is doubt about teachers' loyalties or commitments. Therefore, while acknowledging potential infringement on individual rights of non-citizens wanting to teach permanently in public schools without becoming U.S. citizens themselves, the court ruled such restrictions constitutional due to compelling state interests related primarily around issues of national identity formation.

In the dissenting opinion for Ambach v. Norwick, Justice Marshall argued that denying non-citizens the right to teach in public schools was a violation of their equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He believed that this policy served no compelling state interest and thus failed to meet strict scrutiny standards. Furthermore, he contended that it unfairly assumed all non-citizens were disloyal or incapable of understanding American institutions and values - an assumption he deemed unjustified and discriminatory. The majority's argument about teachers' role as transmitters of societal values did not convince him either; he pointed out many citizens might also hold views contrary to mainstream society but are still allowed to teach because they have freedom of thought protected by First Amendment rights.