-
Larry P. v. Riles
Six African American families that sued the California Department of Education for violating their children's civil rights. The students were placed in special education classes and IQ tests were used to put students in classrooms. The parents stated it was biased against AA students. The court found the IQ tests to be biased against black students and it was intentional and discriminatory. IQ tests were banned permanently. California appealed in 1986, and vacated the original judgment. -
Period: to
Special Education Court Cases
-
All Handicapped Children Act of 1975
Congress enacted a law that was signed by President Ford that guaranteed a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to each child with a disability in every state cross the country. Before the law was enacted many children were denied the access to learn in the public school system. The EHA has made major progress in developing and implementing national goals, programs and services for early intervention, special education, and related services (U.S. Department of Education, 2022, para. 3). -
P.A.R.C v. Pennsylvania
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania argued that if a child has not attained the mental age of five their admission in public school can be postponed indefinitely. The P.A.R.C argued that it violated due process because the school had no notice or hearing, they had no proof that the children were unteachable and all U.S children had the right to a FAPE. The judge ruled it was unconstitutional to deny services to special needs children and violated the students 14th & 5th Amendment rights. -
Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)
Amy Rowley, a first grader who is hearing impaired. Amy's parents requested that Amy be provided a qualified sign language interpreter. The school district agreed then later denied. Amy’s parents received an administrative hearing and lost. The school stated that Amy was achieving academically, socially and educationally without someone interpreting. The Rowley family won in federal court and stated Amy was not receiving a FAPE because she was deprived the chance of achieving her full potential. -
Irving ISD v. Tatro
Amber had spina bifida and suffered from a neurogenic bladder which she needed to be catharized. Amber was too young to perform this technique herself and needed a nurse to perform the procedure. The school denied and the District Court, on remand, held that CIC was a related service under the Education of the Handicapped Act, they ordered that the child education program be modified to include provision of CIC during school hours, and awarded compensatory damages against petitioner. -
Honig v. Doe
John Doe and Jack Smith were students identified as emotionally disturbed suffered from a disorder that kept them from controlling their behaviors. The students were suspended for five days pending expulsion. Both families filed suit and stated the school's disciplinary actions violated the so-called “stay-put” provision of the act. The district court made a ruling that schools cannot take disciplinary action more than 2-5 days, against disable students for disability related misconducts.