ABSTRACT A hallmark of Arizona schools is the choice of parents in program and school for their child under the Open Enrollment laws. Among the choices for parents at some schools is Dual Language education, a form of enrichment wherein students learn the content of the Arizona State Standards through the medium of their primary language and a second language. The schools of this study use English and Spanish as the two languages. After 13 years of existence, changes in enrollment patterns have been noticed. Some parents whose older children attended Dual Language classes have chosen to dis-enroll their families from the program, so that their younger children are in English Only classes. At the same time that these trends in enrollment began, so too did strict enactment, enforcement, and monitoring of Arizona's Structured English Immersion program, the Department of Education's response to the voter approved Proposition 203--English for the Children--in November 2000. This study asks the following research question of de-selecting parents involved with Dual Language programs in Phoenix, Arizona: What are the rationale that influence parents to de-select Dual Language instruction in Arizona public schools in 2010 after having selected Dual Language for their older child(ren)? The study uses a Latino Critical Race Theory (LatCrit) Conceptual Framework to analyze interviews of 10 parents and 2 administrators from Dual Language programs in Phoenix, Arizona. There are three general findings of the study: 1) Parents sought asymmetrical measures of program design if their children were struggling in one language more than another, and chose to de-select when these asymmetrical measures were not enacted, 2) the de-selection process was generally not the result of family decision making, but rather reactionary to a situation, and 3) legislative mandates resulted in de-selection of the program. The LatCrit perspective showed most strongly in the third of these, wherein the de-selection was not necessarily a result of parent de-selection of the program, but rather the state's de-selection of willing participants in a language learning option. The hopes of the study are to hear the voices of parents who have to negotiate language policies and make programmatic choice decisions for their children. I also hope to provide information that Dual Language schools can use to understand the motivations and perspectives of the parents that will enable them to strengthen their programs and advocate for equality in opportunity for enrichment language programs for all children at their schools.