-
Brown v. Board of Education
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. -
Civil Rights Act
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
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 PA
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
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 504
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). -
Education of All Handicapped Children's Act (PL 94-142)
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). -
Armstrong v. Kline
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. -
Larry P v. Riles
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. -
Hendrick Hudson School v. Rowley
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. -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro
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." -
Burlington School Committee v. DOE
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. -
EHA Amendment
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. -
Honig v. DOE
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. -
Danny R.R. v. State Board of Education
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. -
EHA Amendment
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. -
Americans with Disabilities Act
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. -
Oberti v. Board of Education
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. -
Board of Education in Sacramento CA v. Holland
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. -
Gaskin v. Commonwealth of PA
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. -
EHA/IDEA Amendment
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. -
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garrett F.
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. -
No Child Left Behind Act
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. -
IDEA Amendment
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. -
Endrew F. v. the Douglas County School District
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.