-
Brown v. Board of Education
In this landmark court case, the plaintiffs argued that segregated public schools were not equal and directly violated black students' constitutional rights under the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment. The high court ruled that state racially-segregated public schools denied students equal educational opportunities. This case set the precedent for future civil rights action and this "equal protection clause" was further extended to a "class" of people. -
The Civil Rights Act
This significant U.S. legislation was intended to end discrimination based on race, sex, religion, or national origin, and was a hallmark of the American civil rights movement. Title I of the act guarantees equal voting rights. Title IV calls for the desegregation of public schools. Title VII bans discrimination by trade unions, schools, or employers involved in interstate commerce or doing business with the federal government. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. -
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
This law was passed and signed by President Lyndon Johnson. Its purpose was to provide federal money directly to states in order to improve the educational opportunities for disadvantaged children, including students with disabilities who attended state schools for the deaf, blind, and retarded. It was the first time the federal government provided funding to the states to assist with the educational efforts of certain groups of students. -
The Amendments to the ESEA, Title VI
The Bureau for the Education of the Handicapped (BEH) in the United States Office of Education was mandated in Title VI of the ESEA. Title VI provided federal funding to assist states to expand their educational programs for students with disabilities. -
The Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA)
Title VI of the ESEA was replaced by the EHA. Its purpose was to consolidate and expand the previous federal grant programs and to continue funding pilot projects at the state and local levels. It provided funding to states if they would initiate, expand, or improve programs and projects for students with disabilities. It also provided funding to higher education institutions to develop programs to train teachers of students with disabilities. -
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
In this landmark court case, the plaintiffs argued that the rights of students with mental retardation were being violated under the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment because these students were not receiving state-supported public education. It was ruled that all children with mental retardation, between ages 6-21, must be provided a free public education. -
Mills v. Board of Education
This class-action suit was filed against the District of Columbia's Board of Education and also cited the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs argued that students with disabilities were improperly excluded from school without due process of law and that this total exclusion of these students was unconstitutional. It was ruled that the school board provide all children with disabilities a public school education. The district was also required to provide due process safeguards. -
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
This was the first civil rights law passed to protect the rights of individuals with disabilities. It stated that "no otherwise qualified handicapped individual in the United States...shall solely by reason of his handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any activity receiving federal financial assistance." -
The Education Amendments (Amendments to the EHA)
The Education Amendments of 1974 were greatly influenced by the PARC and Mills decisions. These Amendments required all states receiving federal special education funding to establish a state goal of providing full educational opportunities to all students with disabilities. This legislation acknowledged the rights of students with disabilities to an education, created procedural safeguards, provided funds for educational programs, specified due process procedures, and addressed the LRE. -
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA)
President Gerald Ford signed this law which significantly increased the role of the federal government in special education. It required participating states to provide a free appropriate public education for all students with disabilities. It mandated that these students had the right to: evaluation and placement procedures; education in the LRE; procedural due process; a free and an appropriate education as developed in an IEP. Federal funding would be provided to SEAs and LEAs. -
Armstrong v. Kline
In this court case, the plaintiffs argued that their children with severe disabilities required continual education in addition to the 180 days of school in a school year in order to avoid academic regression during the summer months. The court ruled that the "180 day rule" violated the students' rights to free and appropriate public education under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. This led to the creation of Extended School Year (ESY) services for these students. -
Larry P. v. Riles
Larry P. was a black student in the San Francisco Unified School District. He was placed into an "educable mentally retarded" (EMR) class after scoring poorly on a standardized IQ test. His mother argued that the use of IQ tests to evaluate black students violated their rights to equal educational opportunities. IQ tests were racially and culturally discriminatory as they were "designed to evaluate white middle-class students." The court ruled that these IQ tests were culturally biased. -
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley
Amy Rowley was a deaf student in a New York public school. In this court case, her family argued that Rowley was in need of a sign-language interpreter in order to reach her full potential academically. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that EHA (EAHCA-Amendment) did not require that the specially designed instruction and supportive services for students with disabilities be designed to help these students achieve their "full learning potentials." The court's decision defined the term, FAPE. -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro
Amber Tatro was born with spina bifida. This disease caused a bladder condition that required her to be catheterized every few hours. In this court case, her family argued that the school district violated the EAHCA and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 when they refused to provide this related service to their child. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this was indeed a related service and not a medical service since a physician did not have to perform the procedure. -
School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Massachusetts Department of Education
In this court case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that parents could be reimbursed for unilaterally placing their child in a private school setting after they disagreed with the public school IEP under the EAHCA. Michael Panico was found to be handicapped as defined by the EAHCA. His parents did not agree with the proposed public school IEP and sought review under the law. In the meantime, they enrolled him, at their own expense, in a private special education school that was state approved. -
The Education of the Handicapped Amendments
This Amendment required participating states to develop and implement statewide inter-agency programs of early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. These were developmental services provided at public expense and public supervision, and were designed to meet the child's physical, cognitive, communication, social-emotional, and adaptive needs. In states receiving funds, all infants or toddlers with disabilities must have an IFSP. -
The Handicapped Children's Protection Act (HCPA)
President Ronald Reagan signed the HCPA into law. It amended the EAHCA, and granted courts the authority to award attorney's fees to parents or guardians if they prevailed in their court cases against school districts. Prior to this law, parents could not collect attorney's fees under the EAHCA when they had to sue school districts to ensure their rights under the law. -
Honig v. Doe
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a California School Board violated the EAHCA when it indefinitely suspended an emotionally-disturbed student for violent and disruptive behavior in school that was related to his disability. The court maintained that states must provide services directly to students with disabilities when local school boards fail to do so. This court case was based on two emotionally-disturbed students in San Francisco Unified School District. -
Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education
Daniel R.R. was a six year old student with down syndrome. His parents didn't want him in a full-day special education class. The courts ruled that the school district followed all the guidelines under EHA. These LRE ideas were highlighted in this court case: whether education in the regular classroom can be achieved with supplementary aids and services, and whether schools mainstreamed students to the "maximum extent possible" if placement outside the regular education classroom is needed. -
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA Amendments of 1990)
These IDEA Amendments used "people first" language and substituted the word, "disability" for the word, "handicap" throughout the law. It renamed the EAHCA. These 1990 Amendments also added autism and traumatic brain injury as two disability categories. It also required that individualized transition planning be included in the IEPs of students with disabilities who were 16 years old or older. -
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
This U.S. legislation provided civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities. It guaranteed them equal opportunity in public accommodations (e.g., access to all public facilities, restaurants), employment, transportation, state and local government services, and telecommunications. It was signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. The law defined disability as: "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities." -
Board of Education, Sacramento City School District v. Holland
Rachel Holland was a young child with an IQ of 44 and a developmental level of a four year-old. Her parents requested full-time placement in a regular education setting (inclusion). The school district countered with a special education placement. It was ruled that the appropriate placement for Rachel Holland was in a general education classroom with supplemental supports and services under IDEA. The implication of this court case is that more children with disabilities will be included. -
Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District
Rafael Oberti was a young student with down syndrome. His parents were against the school district's decision to place Rafael in a segregated special education class in another school district. The court ruled, under IDEA, that school districts must consider the range of supplementary aids and services prior to segregating a student with a disability from the regular education classroom setting. They also must make the curriculum accessible with modifications to the regular education program. -
The IDEA Amendments
These Amendments were passed to reauthorize and make improvements to IDEA. The goal of the Amendments was to improve the effectiveness of special education by requiring demonstrable improvements in the educational achievement of students with disabilities. Providing a quality education to all students with disabilities became the primary focus with the passage of these Amendments. -
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that IDEA requires school boards to provide continuous nursing services to disabled students who need them during the school day. Garrett F. was a quadriplegic and required a ventilator after his spinal column was severed in a motorcycle accident when he was four years-old. He needed a personal assistant to help him with his health care needs. His mother asked the school board to supply these services to Garrett when he was in fifth grade, but the board refused. -
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
This law was the most recent re-authorization of ESEA signed by President George W. Bush. It expanded the role of the federal government in public education by holding states, school districts, and schools accountable for producing measurable gains in students' achievement in reading and math. The law required states and school districts to use numerical data to provide evidence of improved student achievement. Students with disabilities were included in the law's accountability requirements. -
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA)
President George W. Bush signed this law that builds on NCLB by emphasizing increased accountability for student performance at the classroom, school, and school district levels. The most significant changes in IDEA 2004 are changes in the IEPs, discipline, and identification of students with learning disabilities. This law also requires that all special education teachers be certified in special education and meet the highly qualified teacher requirements of NCLB. -
Gaskin v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
This court case involved families and advocacy groups for students with disabilities. It was argued that students with disabilities in PA have been denied FAPE in the regular educational setting with supplementary aids and services. It was also argued that students were placed in the regular educational setting without supportive aids and services and accommodations needed to be successful. A settlement agreement was filed to ensure that school districts comply with federal laws (LRE). -
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
The ESSA is the most recent re-authorization of ESEA and was signed into law by President Barack Obama. It reduced the role given to the U.S. Department of Education in NCLB and gave leeway to the states to implement the requirements of ESSA in relation to creating accountability systems and addressing the needs of low-performing schools. The law also eliminated certain NCLB requirements, such as adequate yearly progress, accountability provisions, and sanctions. -
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of high standards of education for children with disabilities. The parents of Endrew F. removed him from his local public school, where he made little progress, and placed him in a private school setting, where he made substantial academic and social progress. The court's ruling increases the educational expectations for children with disabilities.