The Supreme Court today, divided 4-4, affirmed the lower court’s ruling in Board of Education v. Tom F. in a blank per curiam opinion. Justice Kennedy had recused himself from this case.

Tom F. centers around the applicabilty of the Individuals with Disabilities Act to students who have not previously recieved education from a public agency.

Does the holding of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, stating that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act permits tuition reimbursement where a child has not previously received special education from a public agency, stand in direct contradiction to the plain language of 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(10)(C)(ii) which authorizes tuition reimbursement to the parents of a disabled child “who previously received special education and related services under the authority of a public agency”?


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Average Age (1800-2010): I've posted a PDF of the Court's average age at the beginning of every term from 1800-present. The ages were taken on the first Monday in Oc...
  • Top Supreme Court Advocates of the Twenty-First Century: I have a new Article out in the Journal of Legal Metrics entitled Top Supreme Court Advocates of the Twenty First Century. You can download ...
  • Profile: H. Bartow Farr, III: In the past, we've profiled notable advocates and judges that were in the news. This is the first in a series of posts about the advocates w...
  • Predicting the April Sitting: I run into the exact same debate every year around mid-January: which cases will be heard during the current term and which will be pushed o...
  • Chief Justice Roberts and Unanimous Decisions: When he was nominated to the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts mentioned that one of his main objectives as chief justice would be to cre...