|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
On Thursday, the US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that public school students with disabilities may pursue discrimination claims under the same standard of proof applied to other institutions facing disability discrimination lawsuits. This decision overturns a more stringent legal standard previously applied by some lower courts specifically in education cases.
Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts rejected the heightened “bad faith or gross misjudgment” test as unsupported by the statutory text. He emphasized that students with disabilities already face significant daily challenges and “do not have to satisfy a more stringent standard of proof than other plaintiffs.” The Court vacated a prior ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings under the less demanding “deliberate indifference” standard.
The ruling arose from A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, a case brought by Ava Tharpe, a Minnesota teenager with a rare form of epilepsy that leaves her alert only after midday. When her school district declined to provide evening instruction to accommodate her condition, Ava received approximately two-thirds of the classroom time afforded to her peers. Lower courts had held that her family could only sue if they proved the school acted with “bad faith or gross misjudgment,” a high bar unique to education discrimination claims.
Ava’s legal team framed the case as a landmark for disability rights, stressing that educational discrimination often has life-altering consequences for children with disabilities. They argued that it was “inconceivable” Congress intended to exclude school-age children—the most vulnerable group of people with disabilities—from the protections of federal disability laws.
The school district countered that the dispute was a disagreement over educational decisions, not discrimination, asserting that the parents’ frustrations did “not evince discriminatory intent under any standard.”
For nearly four decades, several federal appellate courts have required disabled students to prove “bad faith or gross misjudgment” in education-related cases, a doctrine originating with the 1982 Eighth Circuit decision in Monahan v. State of Nebraska. Thursday’s ruling abolishes this doctrine, aligning educational institutions with other public entities such as municipalities, transit authorities, and hospitals, which are liable under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act when acting with deliberate indifference to known accommodation needs.
“Students with disabilities should not face unfair legal barriers that prevent them from enforcing their rights simply because discrimination occurs in schools,” said Zoe Brennan-Krohn, director of the ACLU’s Disability Rights Program. She called the ruling “a critical step toward ensuring that all students with disabilities receive the support they are legally entitled to, enabling them to learn, thrive, and fully participate in their education.”
While the Court’s decision focused narrowly on the applicable legal standard, some justices indicated a willingness to address broader issues in future cases. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, expressed doubt in a concurring opinion about whether plaintiffs should ever succeed without proving discriminatory intent. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a separate concurrence, strongly disagreed, highlighting that disability discrimination frequently results from neglect rather than malicious intent.
Excerpts from Jurist.com article by Joshua Villanueva | George Washington University Law School
