In the 1973 case Lau et al. v. Nichols et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of non-English speaking students from San Francisco who argued that they were being denied an equal educational opportunity because their school did not provide special English language instruction for them. The court held that under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, color or national origin in programs receiving federal funding, these students should be given additional help to learn English so as not to disadvantage them compared with their English-speaking peers. This landmark decision established a precedent for schools across America to offer bilingual education or other forms of assistance for non-English speaking students.

In the dissenting opinion for Lau v. Nichols, Justice William O. Douglas argued that while he agreed with the majority's decision to provide equal educational opportunities for non-English speaking students, he disagreed with their reasoning and approach. He believed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not require schools to offer special language instruction but rather required them to treat all students equally regardless of their race or national origin. He also expressed concern about federal courts intervening in local school matters and dictating specific remedies such as bilingual education programs without clear statutory authority from Congress. Furthermore, he emphasized that it was up to states and local communities - not federal judges - to determine how best to educate their children within constitutional limits.