-
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
LINK: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/348/866/2010674/ STANCE:
The Mills case expanded the ruling of children with developmental disabilities from being denied placement in a public education. The school system in Mills argued that there is a legal obligation to provide a publicly supported education for each resident of the District of Columbia. However, due to the lack of financial services, Mills school system was incapable to facilitate such proposal. -
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
COURT RULING: The court held that no child may be denied a public education because of their identified disabilities such as mental, behavioral, physical or emotional handicaps or deficiencies. In addition, the court Federal court ruled that the school distinctly violated the right of public education for students with disability under the laws of the District of Columbia. -
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
RULING SUPPORTS STUDNETS WITH DISABILITIES With the historical legal ruling of this case, schools have been unable to refuse to comply and aid special education students with public school educational services. As a result of this legal ruling, students with disabilities are not limited to certain educational services specifically for disabled students but has been enlarged to public education and connections to further provide available resources and funds to aid their learning structure. -
Honig v. Doe
LINK: http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/ussupct.honig.doe.htm STANCE:
John Doe's grandparents argued that a child with a disability, who is disciplined based on actions arising out of that child’s disability may not be subjected to school disciplinary actions including expulsion, without the right to due process. The California School Board denied argument and indefinitely suspended Doe which violated the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. -
Honig v. Doe
RULING: The Honig ruling reiterated the case of expelling a student with identified disability based on the components of actions out of the child’s disability. In Honig, the Court ruled that a school district may not unilaterally exclude or expel a disabled child from the classroom setting for dangerous or disruptive conduct growing out of their disabilities. The court emphasized the importance of a school district following the procedural safeguards contained with the IDEA. -
Honig v. Doe
LEGAL RULINGS SUPPORTS STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES The Honig v. Doe legal ruling supports the needs of students with disabilities as it enhances the importance of Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Students with disabilities should not indefinitely suspended and will remain in current educational placements during any review proceedings unless there is an agreement intrigued by parents and educational officials. -
Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H
LINK: https://www.leagle.com/decision/19921660786fsupp87411558 STANCE:
Rachel Holland is an 11-year-old that was mentally handicapped with an intelligence quotient. Holland’s parents requested Holland to be placed full-time into a regular classroom for her kindergarten year. However, the Sacramento City Unified School district rejected this request and offered a placement that divided her educational time between a special-education and a regular-education classroom. -
Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H
COURT RULING:
The initial appeal of the placement was heard by a state hearing officer under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and was determined that the district should have placed Holland in a regular-education classroom full-time. The district court gave significant weight to the testimony of Holland’s private school teacher, who said that Holland was making progress toward her individualized-education plan (IEP) goals in her regular-education classroom. -
Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H
LEGAL RULINGS SUPPORTS STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: Every learner should be entitled to equal opportunities and facilitate learning in an ethical environment that does not refuse educational services regardless of student disabilities. The ruling supports students with disabilities as it rescinds any barrier or reasoning from districts to refuse to provide educational opportunities and services to all students in general education population that will benefit their individual academic pursuit. -
References
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1942). Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/348/866/2010674/ Honig v. Doe (1988). Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/ussupct.honig.doe.htm Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H (1993). Retrieved from https://www.leagle.com/decision/19921660786fsupp87411558