History of CHE

CHE was involved in two important court cases:

  •     To desegregate DPS schools (CHE worked as “plaintiffs-intervenors” In Keyes et al)
  •     To ensure that bilingual students (“Limited English Proficient” in the court’s legal language) had access to equal education

Desegregation


1969 Keyes v. School District Number One, Denver, ŷڱƵ, 303 F. Supp. 279 (District Court)

  •     DPS ordered to desegregate
  •     District Court later reverses; Tenth Circuit Court reverses
  •     Keyes et al appeals to the Supreme Court

1973 Keyes v. School Dist. No. One, 396 U.S. 1215 (Supreme Court)

  •     DPS ruled to desegregate
  •     This case was also notable because it confirmed that “hispanics” were an identifiable class for 14th amendment purposes and thus DPS could no longer argue that a school with a majority African American and Latinx population was desegregated.
  •     Overview .
  •     SCOTUS ruling (written by Justice Brennan)

1997 Keyes v. Congress of Hispanic Educators, 902 F. Supp. 1274 (District Court)

  •     Judge Matsch ends court oversight of DPS segregation
  •     Judge Matsch decides to continue court oversight of DPS regarding their programming for bilingual students, finding that CHE’s complaint that DPS has failed to comply with the Language Rights Consent Decree of August 17, 1984 deserves ongoing attention
  •     “The allegations of failure to comply with the Language Rights Consent Decree of August 17, 1984, made by plaintiff-intervenor Congress of Hispanic Educators, are removed from this civil action and will be dealt with as a separate and independent proceeding designated as Civil Action No. 95-M-2313, with its own jurisdictional base under the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, codified in 20 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1721 and particularly §§ 1703(f) and 1708” (Judge Matsch, )


Access to Equal Education for Bilingual Students


1980   

  • CHE filed a supplemental complaint based on the the Equal Educational Opportunities Act (1974) to argue that “limited-English proficient” students also experienced unequal education ( [DPS] to modify Language Rights Order of 1984)

1983 Keyes v. School Dist. No. 1, 576 F. Supp. 1503 (District Court)   

  •     CHE argues that “limited-English proficient” students must be considered as a unique class also deserving protections
  •     The court ruled that although DPS was not legally obligated to provide bilingual education, it was obligated to “to take appropriate action to eliminate language barriers which currently prevent a great number of students from participating equally in the educational programs offered by the district” and that “the issues which have been brought before the court by the plaintiff-intervenors [CHE] are part and parcel of the mandate to establish a unitary [desegregated] school system” ().
  •     In other words, CHE successfully argued that providing services to ensure that bilingual students have access to equal education is indistinguishable from desegregation
  •     Full history .

1984 Order Approving Program for Limited English Proficient Students (“1984 Order”)

  •     Court oversight of DPS’s plans to improve education for bilingual students officially begins as Consent Decree
  •     CHE continues to be plaintiff
  •     1968-1984 Court Order
  •     Ruling is titled Keyes v. School Dist. No. 1, No. C-1499 (D. Colo. Aug. 17, 1984)

1995

  •     DPS files a motion to be let out from the Court Order

1999

  •     A proposed settlement is reached
  •     The day after the proposed settlement is submitted to the court, the United States of America files a and is approved to become a “Plaintiff-Intervenor”
  •     The United States seeks this status due to the U.S. Department of Education’s 1997 findings that DPS had violated the Civil Rights Act; since DPS had not voluntarily complied with the 1984 Court Order, the Department of Education referred the case to the Department of Justice, which continues to oversee DPS today ()
  •     Judge Matsch approves to replace 1984 plan
  •    
  •    

2012

  •     to replace 1999 plan
  •     CHE continues as plaintiff with the Department of Justice as Plaintiff-Intervenor
  •     New plan includes: (a) and (b) provision for site visits
  •     Summary .
  •     Contemporary Chalkbeat piece .

CHE on stage

  CHE on stage

  Entire history .

 

  Case: Congress of Hispanic Educators v. School District No. 1 .

History of Congress of Hispanic Educators (CHE) & Denver Public Schools (DPS)

1960s → CHE begins as a coalition of DPS teachers and community members advocating for the educational rights of bilingual/Latinx students
1983 → Keyes v. School Dist. No. 1 District Court case

  •     CHE argues that “limited-English proficient” students must be considered as a unique class also deserving protections.
  •     The court rules “the issues which have been brought before the court by the plaintiff-intervenors [CHE] are part and parcel of the mandate to establish a unitary [desegregated] school system”

 

History of the BUENO Center with CHE & DPS


1984 → Order Approving Program for Limited English   Proficient Students (“1984 Order”)

  •     Court oversight of DPS’s plans to improve education for bilingual students officially begins as Court Order CHE continues as plaintiff.
  •     The BUENO Center is  involved with the first set of training for teachers on English as a Second Language instruction mandated by the court order

1997 → Keyes v. Congress of Hispanic Educators

  • Court oversight of DPS desegregation ends but the judge finds that CHE’s complaint that DPS has failed to comply with the Language Rights order of 1984 deserves ongoing attention

2012 → New Consent Decree (CD) is approved

Today

  •     CHE continues to provide oversight in collaboration with the other parties, the Court Monitor and with assistance from the BUENO Center.
  •     The BUENO Center provides professional development, and grant writing assistance to obtain grant money to prepare teachers