And we open with great news for TAS from SCOTUS. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling, held that a school district can be required to reimburse a family for private school if the student's need were not adquately met. This includes situations in which the student did not have a prior IEP. Here is a quote from the dissent:
“Special education can be immensely expensive, amounting to tens of billions of dollars annually and as much as 20 percent of public schools’ general operating budgets,” Justice Souter wrote. “Given the burden of private school placement, it makes good sense to require parents to try to devise a satisfactory alternative within the public schools.”
Obviously, that sort of reasoning, were it guiding the majority opinion, wouldn't help TAS very much. But thanks to a combination of conservatives (Alito, Roberts), quasi-progressives (Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer) and the usual swing-vote Kennedy, the interests of individual students are being asserted over that of a school district's management problems. Interestingly,
both pro-voucher and usually reactionary justices joined Souter's dissent. Go figure. I look forward to reading the whole opinion.
Here is a good summary from the reliable SCOTUSBLOG (and here for the NYT article)
Today, the Supreme Court held that parents of disabled children can seek reimbursement for private education expenses regardless whether their child had previously received special-education services from a public school. By a vote of six to three, the Court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) authorizes reimbursement whenever a public school fails to make a free appropriate public education (FAPE) available to a disabled child. Interestingly, the Court granted certiorari on the same question in 2007 but affirmed the opinion below by an equally divided court (Justice Kennedy recused himself), indicating that at least one Justice changed his or her vote.
“Special education can be immensely expensive, amounting to tens of billions of dollars annually and as much as 20 percent of public schools’ general operating budgets,” Justice Souter wrote. “Given the burden of private school placement, it makes good sense to require parents to try to devise a satisfactory alternative within the public schools.”
Obviously, that sort of reasoning, were it guiding the majority opinion, wouldn't help TAS very much. But thanks to a combination of conservatives (Alito, Roberts), quasi-progressives (Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer) and the usual swing-vote Kennedy, the interests of individual students are being asserted over that of a school district's management problems. Interestingly,
both pro-voucher and usually reactionary justices joined Souter's dissent. Go figure. I look forward to reading the whole opinion.
Here is a good summary from the reliable SCOTUSBLOG (and here for the NYT article)
Today, the Supreme Court held that parents of disabled children can seek reimbursement for private education expenses regardless whether their child had previously received special-education services from a public school. By a vote of six to three, the Court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) authorizes reimbursement whenever a public school fails to make a free appropriate public education (FAPE) available to a disabled child. Interestingly, the Court granted certiorari on the same question in 2007 but affirmed the opinion below by an equally divided court (Justice Kennedy recused himself), indicating that at least one Justice changed his or her vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment