crimethink
22nd March 2017, 06:02 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/22/us/politics/gorsuch-education.html
Schools may not settle for minimal educational progress by disabled students, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday, rejecting a standard that some lower courts have applied, and that the nominee to join the high court, Neil M. Gorsuch, has been criticized for using.
The federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act requires “free appropriate public education” for all children. In multiple cases, the federal Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver, has held that the law demands little “more than de minimis” — merely a program intended for a student to show some annual gains.
“It cannot be the case that the Act typically aims for grade-level advancement for children with disabilities who can be educated in the regular classroom, but is satisfied with barely more than de minimis progress for those who cannot,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for a unanimous court.
“When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all,” he wrote. “The IDEA demands more. It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
In a 2008 ruling, Judge Gorsuch, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, applied the “de minimis” standard in rejecting a parents’ claim that a school’s provisions for their autistic child were inadequate.
Schools may not settle for minimal educational progress by disabled students, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday, rejecting a standard that some lower courts have applied, and that the nominee to join the high court, Neil M. Gorsuch, has been criticized for using.
The federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act requires “free appropriate public education” for all children. In multiple cases, the federal Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver, has held that the law demands little “more than de minimis” — merely a program intended for a student to show some annual gains.
“It cannot be the case that the Act typically aims for grade-level advancement for children with disabilities who can be educated in the regular classroom, but is satisfied with barely more than de minimis progress for those who cannot,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for a unanimous court.
“When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all,” he wrote. “The IDEA demands more. It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
In a 2008 ruling, Judge Gorsuch, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, applied the “de minimis” standard in rejecting a parents’ claim that a school’s provisions for their autistic child were inadequate.