-
This case consolidated five lawsuits from African American families claiming their children were denied equal education due to racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine.
Primary focus: To challenge the constitutionality of racial segregation in public education, which the plaintiff argued that it breached the 14th Amendment.
Outcome: This case overturned Plessy v. Ferguson driving school desegregation and paving the way for the civil Rights Movements. -
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 aimed to end discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Its primary focus: To eliminate segregation in public places and employment discrimination.
Outcome: Led to the desegregation of schools and public facilities and providing legal tools to challenge discriminatory practices. -
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) focused on addressing educational inequality by providing federal funding to schools serving low-income students.
Primary Focus: To close the achievement gap between students from different socio-economic backgrounds.
Outcome: The Act led to increased federal support for education, improved educational resources, and programs targeting disadvantaged schools, significantly impacting educational opportunities for underprivileged children. -
PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was a key case where PARC challenged the state's exclusion of children with intellectual disabilities from public education.
Primary Focus: To ensure that all children, regardless of their disabilities, had the right to a free and appropriate public education.
Outcome: The court ruled for PARC, requiring Pennsylvania to educate all children with disabilities, a key step in advancing inclusive education and shaping future special education laws. -
Mills v. Board of Education was a key case where plaintiffs challenged the denial of free public education to students with disabilities in the District of Columbia."
Primary Focus: "To guarantee a free, appropriate public education for children with disabilities and address exclusion and inadequate services."
Outcome: The court ordered the District of Columbia to provide educational services and programs for all children with disabilities, upholding inclusive education and due process. -
The Rehabilitation Act Section 504, was crucial in preventing disability discrimination in federally funded programs."
Primary focus: To ensure that people with disabilities had equal access to education, employment, and other services.
Outcome: There significant expansion of rights and protections for individuals with disabilities, laying the groundwork for later laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). -
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) was a pivotal law focused on guaranteeing a free, appropriate public education for all children with disabilities.
Primary focus: To ensure that children with disabilities were provided with special education services and accommodations.
Outcome: There was a significant improvement in educational access and quality for children with disabilities, setting the stage for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). -
The Armstrong v. Kline case was a key litigation concerning the rights of children with disabilities to receive an appropriate education.
Primary Focus: Focused on whether Pennsylvania's public schools were providing a free, appropriate education to students with disabilities, including during the summer.
Outcome: There was a ruling that mandated the provision of educational services during the summer to prevent regression and ensure educational progress for children with disabilities. -
The Larry P. v. Riles case addressed the use of IQ tests in the placement of African American students into special education programs in California.
Primary focus: To assess if these tests were discriminatory and led to disproportionate placement of African American students in special education.
Outcome: The ruling found the tests discriminatory, leading to changes in assessment practices and increased scrutiny in special education evaluations. -
The Hendrick Hudson School District v. Rowley case was a landmark Supreme Court decision concerning the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (now IDEA).
Primary focus: Was on defining the standard for "free, appropriate public education" (FAPE) for students with disabilities.
Outcome: A school must provide meaningful educational benefits, but is not required to offer the best education or maximize a student’s potential. -
The Irving Independent School District v. Tatro case addressed students' rights to necessary medical services during school hours under IDEA.
Primary focus: Whether schools were required to provide specific medical services that allowed a child to attend school.
Outcome: The Supreme Court ruled that schools must provide necessary medical services as part of a "free, appropriate public education." -
The Burlington School Committee v. Doe case addressed private school tuition reimbursement for students with disabilities under IDEA.
Primary focus: To determine if parents could be reimbursed for private school costs when the public school failed to provide appropriate education.
Outcome: The Supreme Court ruled that parents could be reimbursed for private school tuition if the public school failed to provide an appropriate education and the private placement was suitable. -
The Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA) amendments of 1986 expanded protections for students with disabilities.
Primary focus: On including services for preschool-aged children with disabilities and extending early intervention services for infants and toddlers.
Outcome: Mandated services for children from birth to age five, expanding special education and early intervention, improving support for younger children with disabilities. -
The Honig v. Doe case addressed the rights of students with disabilities regarding disciplinary actions.
Primary focus: To determine if schools could suspend or expel students with disabilities for behavior related to their disabilities without alternative educational services.
Outcome: The Supreme Court ruled that schools cannot exclude students with disabilities for behavior related to their disabilities without providing alternative educational services. -
The Danny R.R. v. State Board of Education case addressed if a public school must provide an appropriate, least restrictive placement for a student with disabilities.
Primary focus: On whether the school had met its obligations under IDEA by offering a placement that was appropriate and integrated with non-disabled peers.
Outcome: The court ruled the school district's placement met the requirements if it benefited the student and offered integration. -
The EHA Amendment of 1990 (now IDEA) focused on enhancing the rights and services for individuals with disabilities.
Primary focus: Focused on including autism and traumatic brain injury as disability categories, requiring transition planning, and emphasizing services in the least restrictive environment.
Outcome: The amendment expanded protections and services, emphasizing transition planning and greater integration of students with disabilities into regular settings. -
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was a landmark law preventing discrimination against individuals with disabilities in public life.
Primary focus: Ensuring equal access to employment, public services, accommodations, and telecommunications for individuals with disabilities.
Outcome: The ADA mandated accessibility and non-discrimination, improving accommodations and inclusion for individuals with disabilities, and setting a new standard for disability rights. -
The Oberti v. Board of Education case addressed the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular education classrooms.
Primary focus: "Whether the district met its IDEA obligation for least restrictive environment and regular classroom inclusion."
Outcome: The court ruled for the student, noting the district failed to provide adequate support for regular classroom inclusion and stressing the need for reasonable efforts and necessary supports for success. -
The Board of Education of Sacramento City Unified School District v. Holland case addressed whether IDEA required special education services in the least restrictive environment.
Primary focus: Whether the district's separate classroom placement met integration and educational benefit requirements.
Outcome: The court ruled that the school district's placement was appropriate under IDEA, providing necessary educational benefits while balancing integration with the student’s needs. -
The Gaskin v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania case examined if Pennsylvania met IDEA’s least restrictive environment requirements for students with disabilities.
Primary focus: Whether the state's placements met inclusion standards and provided adequate support for integration into regular classrooms.
Outcome: The court found Pennsylvania did not meet its IDEA obligations and required improvements for better support and inclusion of students with disabilities. -
The EHA/IDEA Amendments focused on enhancing educational opportunities and protections for students with disabilities.
Primary focus: To improve transition planning, increase parental involvement, ensure school progress, and address discipline fairly for students with disabilities.
Outcome: A greater focus on inclusion, improved transition services, and enhanced educational results and parental involvement, boosting special education quality. -
The Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garrett F. case addressed whether health-related services are required under FAPE in IDEA.
Primary focus: On whether the district was obligated to provide services such as one-on-one nursing care required by a student with disabilities during school hours.
Outcome: The Supreme Court ruled that health services were necessary for the student’s education and must be provided by the school district as part of FAPE. -
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) aimed to improve educational outcomes by increasing accountability, standards, and testing.
Primary focus: On closing the achievement gap with high standards, annual testing in reading and math, and accountability for schools and teachers.
Outcome: Emphasized standardized testing and accountability, but faced criticism for pressuring schools and neglecting diverse student needs. NCLB was replaced by ESSA in 2015. -
The IDEA Amendments aimed to improve the effectiveness of special education.
Primary focus: To improve accountability, streamline disability services, involve general education teachers in planning, enhance IEP quality, and clarify dispute resolution.
Outcome: Included stricter standards for educational progress, clearer IEP guidelines, and better integration of special education into general education, improving service quality and efficiency. -
The Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District case addressed the standard for "free, appropriate public education" (FAPE) under IDEA.
Primary focus: On whether the district’s education plan for a student with autism met the standard of enabling meaningful progress based on individual needs.
Outcome: The Supreme Court ruled for the student, setting a higher standard that schools must provide an IEP designed for meaningful educational benefit, not just minimal progress.