Federal Legislation & News
in Special Education
More Federal Special Education News is available in our Archive
COPAA Files Amicus Brief in U.S. Supreme Court Urging the End of the Uniquely High Intent Standard in Disability Discrimination Claims Brought by Schoolchildren
Last week, COPAA and 11 other advocacy groups filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in the case A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, arguing that the Court should reverse the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in this case and end the imposition of a uniquely high and burdensome standard that schoolchildren must meet to prove disability discrimination. You can read the amicus brief here.
At the center of this case is the “bad faith or gross misjudgment” standard applied by several circuit courts of appeals to claims brought under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by families of students with disabilities. This very high standard appears nowhere in the actual text of either the ADA or Section 504. However, since its decision in the 1982 case Monahan v. Nebraska, the Eighth Circuit has required families to prove that school districts acted with intent—specifically, bad faith or gross misjudgment—in discriminating against IDEA-eligible students. This very high standard does not apply to claims brought by plaintiffs alleging disability discrimination in any other context; it applies only to schoolchildren.
COPAA and its fellow amici establish in the amicus brief that “under the appropriate standard—the standard applicable to everyone outside the K-12 school setting,” countless schoolchildren alleging disability discrimination “would have been compensated for the harms caused by the discrimination that Section 504 and the ADA seek to remedy.”
Joining COPAA on the brief are The Arc of the United States, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Children’s Law Center, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Education Law Center, Learning Rights Law Center, Minnesota Legal Aid, National Center for Youth Law, National Disability Rights Network, National Health Law Project, and the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.
The amicus brief was written by Brian Wolfman (Counsel of Record) and Regina Wang of the Georgetown Law Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic and COPAA Legal Director Selene Almazan. COPAA member Amy J. Goetz, founder of the School Law Center in Minnesota, represents the family in this case, which will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court by Roman Martinez of Latham & Watkins, LLP.
COPAA Files Amicus Brief in the Ninth Circuit Highlighting the Importance of the “Knew or Should Have Known” Standard in the IDEA’s Statute of Limitations
Last week, COPAA submitted an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit supporting the family of a child with dyslexia in T.M.J. v. Vallejo City Unified School District. COPAA’s brief urged the Ninth Circuit to reverse the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, which applied a rigid view of the statute of limitations for Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) cases. You can read the amicus brief here.
The IDEA’s statute of limitations requires that a party request a due process hearing within two years of the date when the party “knew or should have known about the alleged action that forms the basis of the complaint….” 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f)(3)(C).
COPAA emphasized in its brief that the IDEA’s child find obligation applies to school districts, not to parents, and that the district court improperly shifted the obligation to parents, “who often have no knowledge of IDEA procedures or their accompanying rights.” This approach is particularly inappropriate with respect to T.M.J., who has dyslexia, which has complex diagnostic criteria that can be difficult for parents to understand. COPAA noted that the district court’s restrictive interpretation of the “Knew or Should Have Known” standard for the IDEA’s statute of limitations will lead to well-resourced students being granted IDEA protections, while lower income students—particularly those with disabilities that are difficult to detect—will not have those same protections.
The amicus brief was written by Jacob T. Randolph (Counsel of Record), Eric D. Vandevelde, Kiernan Panish, Swathi Sreerangarajan, and Kamia Williams of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP; and by COPAA Legal Director Selene Almazan.
States AGs Issue Joint Guidance to Counter Federal Dear Colleague Letter on DEI
On March 5th, a coalition of attorneys general (AGs) from fifteen states issued Joint Guidance for higher education and K-12 institutions that clarifies the law regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion. Prompted by a recent Executive Order and a Dear Colleague letter from the Trump Administration, the Joint Guidance “addresses the Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision on race conscious admissions policies at institutions of higher education and clarifies the legal landscape for Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) and K-12 schools operating in our states as they work to advance educational goals and access to educational opportunities.” Especially helpful are the questions and answers (Q&As) posed at the end of the document. Q&As cover topics such as: promoting safe and supportive K-12 school environments and preparing all students for college or careers. The Joint Guidance was signed by the Attorneys General of Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.
Trump Education Secretary Confirmed Despite Special Ed Concerns
Disability Scoop
The nation has a new Secretary of Education, and she’s angling to free her department from its special education obligations. The U.S. Senate voted 51 to 45 along party lines this week to confirm Linda McMahon to lead the Department of Education. The move comes despite opposition from many disability advocates concerned by McMahon’s limited knowledge of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and her plans for the special education program. During confirmation hearings, the former WWE executive was short on specifics when asked what IDEA promises students with disabilities, and she repeatedly suggested to senators that oversight of the program should no longer be housed within the Education Department. “Special education, I think it very well could go back to HHS where it started,” McMahon said, referencing the Department of Health and Human Services. In addition, McMahon proposed moving the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which handles complaints of disability discrimination in schools, to the Justice Department.
DOGE education cuts hit students with disabilities, literacy research
Chalkbeat
When teens and young adults with disabilities in California’s Poway Unified School District heard about a new opportunity to get extra help planning for life after high school, nearly every eligible student signed up. The program, known as Charting My Path for Future Success, aimed to fill a major gap in education research about what kinds of support give students nearing graduation the best shot at living independently, finding work, or continuing their studies. Students with disabilities finish college at much lower rates than their non-disabled peers and often struggle to tap into state employment programs for adults with disabilities, said Stacey McCrath-Smith, a director of special education at Poway Unified, which had 135 students participating in the program. So the extra help, which included learning how to track goals on a tool designed for high schoolers with disabilities, was much needed. Charting My Path launched earlier this school year in Poway Unified and 12 other school districts. The salaries of 61 school staff nationwide, and the training they received to work with nearly 1,100 high schoolers with disabilities for a year and a half, was paid for by the U.S. Department of Education. Then, the Trump administration pulled the plug.
How Department of Education cuts could hurt resources for students with disabilities
PBS News
Fourteen-year-old Spencer Nichols loves taking care of his farm animals at home in Macon, Georgia. It’s a break after a long school day, where he has little autonomy. Spencer has Down syndrome. Almost the entire day, he’s in a small classroom with other students with disabilities. His mother, Pam Nichols, says he’s denied the same chance to succeed as his non-disabled peers. She says he can’t pick his own elective classes and isn’t progressing like he should. Pam says Spencer should be in more general education classes, but his middle school lacks the resources and staff to support students with disabilities. “Unfortunately, his one class is science that he is allowed to be in the gen ed classroom. They had a science test. I messaged the teacher, and I said, What am I supposed to be focused on for Spencer? And she said, we will have Spencer color during the science test. I said, well, you don’t understand. I want him to learn this.”
Why a Department of Education closure is concern for students with disabilities
WKMS
Parents of kids with disabilities are used to fighting – fighting for understanding, for acceptance, and for resources. That is why so many of them fear the possible elimination of the Department of Education. That’s the federal agency that distributes federal funds meant to help educate kids with disabilities. Now, to be clear, eliminating the Department of Education does not mean the funding will go away entirely. Still, many parents are very concerned. One of those parents is Kristy Hedler. Her son, Kellen, has Down syndrome and receives special education services at school. Kristy is also a parent services advocate at the nonprofit Oklahoma Parents for Student Achievement.
Update on Proposed Medicaid Cuts
The House and Senate still have their different versions of the reconciliation resolutions. To use reconciliation, the House and the Senate must agree on a single approach, and they are negotiating. Republican Leadership will have to walk a line between factions that don’t think the proposed cuts to Medicaid went far enough and those that are concerned about the impact of Medicaid cuts on their constituents and the states they represent. The next step is for the Senate to take up the House-passed budget, likely making amendments, which may happen in late March, after the joint recess.
Republicans are feeling the pressure. Medicaid is popular, among both Trump and Harris voters, and Republicans do not want to admit that they are voting to take health care away from people. We have heard repeatedly that some Republican House staff are telling constituents and advocates that they did not vote to cut Medicaid, but instead merely voted to start the reconciliation process. Make no mistake–the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently released a report confirming that the House budget resolution would require deep cuts to Medicaid.
Meanwhile, over the last two weeks, state and local officials have raised alarm over the impact of proposed Medicaid cuts, driving home that Medicaid is not a red state, purple state, blue state issue, and that federal cuts to Medicaid create huge budget holes that states cannot fill.
Republican Medicaid Cuts Could Shutter Rural Hospitals, Maternity Care
Washington Post
Republican-led Medicaid cuts could severely impact rural hospitals and maternity care services, potentially driving essential healthcare access in underserved regions to a breaking point. Rural communities, already facing healthcare disparities, could be hit hardest by these proposed cuts.
Republican Voters Support Medicaid but Want Work Requirements, Poll Finds
New York Times
A poll reveals that while many Republican voters support Medicaid, they also advocate for implementing work requirements for recipients. However, a significant misconception exists, with 62% of voters incorrectly believing that most Medicaid enrollees are unemployed, even though the vast majority are employed.
GOP Must Cut Medicaid or Medicare to Achieve Budget Goals, CBO Finds
The Washington Post
In its recent report, the CBO confirms that Republicans must cut either Medicaid or Medicare to reach their budgetary targets. This challenge highlights the political and economic difficulties Republicans face in trying to rein in spending while managing the growing costs of healthcare programs.
Republicans Need to Cut Medicaid to Hit Budget Savings Target, CBO Finds
The Hill
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) indicates that Republicans will need to reduce Medicaid spending in order to meet their fiscal savings goals. As the GOP continues to struggle with rising healthcare costs, Medicaid has become a primary target for cuts to balance the budget.
As GOP Eyes Medicaid Cuts, Trump Tries to Avoid the Political Third Rails
Washington Post
Former President Trump is seeking to avoid the political pitfalls surrounding proposed Medicaid cuts while aligning with Republican fiscal goals. His cautious approach reflects the complex political landscape in which cutting Medicaid could alienate key voter groups.
Republicans Once Maligned Medicaid. Now Some See It as a Program Too Big to Touch
AP News
Once a target for cuts by many Republicans, Medicaid has become a program that some now view as too integral to the nation’s healthcare system to alter. The growing scale and importance of Medicaid have shifted the party’s approach, making it a political issue that many Republicans are now reluctant to tackle.