Which legal case emphasizes the need for appropriate educational accommodations for non-native English speakers?

The case that underscores the necessity for appropriate educational accommodations for non-native English speakers is Lau v. Nichols. In this landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue of equal educational opportunities for students who do not primarily speak English. The court ruled that the San Francisco school district's failure to provide bilingual education or English language instruction to non-English-speaking students amounted to discrimination. This case established a clear precedent, emphasizing that school districts have a legal obligation to take effective steps to ensure that language barriers do not impede the educational progress of non-native English speakers.

In contrast, Rowley v. Board of Education primarily dealt with the rights of students with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and how schools must provide a free appropriate public education. Marshall v. Georgia does not specifically pertain to language accommodations, and Tarasoff is related to the duty of care in mental health, which is outside the context of educational accommodations for language barriers. Therefore, Lau v. Nichols stands out as the key case focused on educational access for non-native English speakers.