At that time, 2,856 Chinese and Hispanic students, who were not fluent in English, were integrated back into the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD).

"[3] Edward H. Steinman, a public-interest lawyer, reached out to the parents of Kinney Kinmon Lau and other Chinese students with limited English proficiency.

In this case, the Supreme Court found a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on the discriminatory effect of the school policy, regardless of the intent of the officials.

It prohibited the "sink or swim" policy and set a precedent of finding disparate impact in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

[8] It increased funding to the Bilingual Education Act and made additional English instruction mandatory, which effectively extended the Lau ruling to all public schools.

It implied that students can no longer sue schools for policies that cause disparate impact, which significantly weakened the foundation of the Lau decision.