High court rules in favor of special need students
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Monday that parents can win reimbursement for the private school tuition of a child with special needs, even if the child did not first receive special education in a public school.
The decision involving a teen from Oregon is a victory for parents who are looking for options for their children with disabilities and a blow to school districts, such as Forest Grove in Oregon, that say that a reimbursement policy could hurt financially burdened public schools.
In Monday's case, a boy identified only as "T.A." had long struggled in school as administrators failed to adequately assess his learning disabilities, which turned out to include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). When his problems worsened in his high school junior year, his parents sought outside professional advice and then moved him to a private school.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires states receiving federal funds to provide for the education of children with disabilities in their states. When a public school program fails to meet those needs and a student transfers to a private school, the district can be required to reimburse the parents for that private education.
The question in Monday's case was whether the IDEA, as amended in 1997, prohibits reimbursement for private education costs if a child has not previously received special services in public schools. Lower federal courts were split on how to answer the question.
On Monday, in an opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens, the court said the law has no such limit. "We conclude that IDEA authorizes reimbursement for the cost of private special-education services when a school district fails to provide a (free appropriate public education) and the private-school placement is appropriate, regardless of whether the child previously received special education or related services through the school," Stevens wrote.
He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito. Dissenting were Justice David Souter, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
