The U. S. Supreme Court will decide what is the standard of education public schools must provide to students with disabilities. Specifically, the dispute is about the intention in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) for the level of education public schools must offer.
In 1982, the U. S. Supreme Court stated that IDEA contains no “substantial standard prescribing the level of education to be accorded handicapped children.” Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Cen. Sch. Dist. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 189 (1982). Due to Rowley, the Supreme Court allows States to provide a program “reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive education benefits” then it “has complied with the obligations imposed by Congress and the courts can require no more.” Rowley at 206-207.
Should IDEA be interpreted to demand school districts to provide a “substantial” education or merely make an effort to educate children? Cases from various Courts of Appeals conflict with their interpretation of IDEA.
Endrew F. is a minor child with autism whose parents filed suit against the Douglas County School District. Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) is a legal document containing written statements regarding the student’s education program. Endrew F.’s parents objected to the District’s offering of substantially similar IEPs year after year and not the achieving the level of education that meets an appropriate standard for Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”).
Oral arguments before the Supreme Court are scheduled for mid-January.