-
PARC vs Pennsylvania
The PARC in 1972, argued that based upon four state statutes on behalf of 14 students that they were denied public education.The plaintiffs argued that, under Brown, their rights were violated under the equal protection clause and due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Based on the evidence presented to the courts, each disabled child were given a free and appropriate education.” This is, in part, the framework for FAPE and the IDEA. -
Board of Education vs Rowley
In Rowley, the Court elaborated on what is appropriate under FAPE. Amy Rowley was a deaf child that performed better than the typical child in her mainstream classroom and was easily advancing from grade to grade in LRE with the use of a FM hearing aid.Amy’s parents requested the school district provide Amy with a qualified sign-language interpreter in all classes, asserting that under the IDEA, such measures were deemed “appropriate.” The students were given extra support if needed. -
Honig v. Doe
The Honig decision is a landmark case in which the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with the issue of expelling a disabled child based on actions arising out of that child’s disability. The Court ruled that a 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 Honig case is a landmark decision because the Court created what is now known as the “ten-day rule and the rise of FBA.