-
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Pennsylvania Commonwealth and Mills v. Board of Education
The plaintiffs PARC, argue that intellectual children ages 6 yrs.to 21yrs were prevented & deny their equal rights to an education.
The defendants argue those rights should apply only to the children that could benefit from an education.
Summary: The state agreed & approve giving intellectual children their equal rights to a free and appropriate public education. These ruling helps million of disabled children to continue to receive an education. -
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142)
Before this Act, children with disabilities were excluded from public education.The Act name changed to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990.
The plaintiff argue for children with disabilities to be educated in schools.
The defendant argue only children that could benefit should be allowed to attend school.
The courts agreed with the 14th amendment, ruling for all children.
These ruling helped to ensure education for all children regardless of race, disability, or origin. -
The No Child Left Behind Act 2001 (P.L.107-110)
Plaintiff argue to close the gap of achievements, with accountability, flexibility, and choices. Fair and equal education for all children
The defendant believe that the school will be label as failures even when they are not
The court ruled that the provision was according to the Bush administration, a violation of the constitution. These ruling allow for a higher quality of education for minorities, disabled, and failing students, while increasing funding support for the failing schools