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

  • A Classic Oral Argument Passage: Today's New York Times article about Paul Clement, "Lawyer Opposing Health Law is Familiar Face to the Justices", reminds me of an interesti...
  • Advocate Scorecard: Win-Loss Record for the Top Advocates: I've compiled a really interesting list featuring the win-loss record of every advocate from the SG's office and all of the top private advo...
  • Updated Term Charts: Starting this week, I'll be posting my updated charts on SCOTUSblog. You can find the first SB version of my charts here. More spec...
  • Term Index Updated: I've updated the Term Case Index to reflect the four opinions handed down this week. Earlier today I released opinion authorship statistics ...
  • Top Female Advocates Before the Supreme Court: To celebrate Patricia Millett's record-breaking thirty-first Supreme Court argument last week in Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatom...