Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhile Gorsuch was testifying, the Supreme Court unanimously said he was wrong
https://thinkprogress.org/while-gorusch-was-testifying-the-supreme-court-unanimously-said-he-was-wrong-33b9ff7eca77#.fabxrvr4mAbout 40 minutes after Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch began his second day of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, all eight of the justices he hopes to join said a major disability decision Gorsuch wrote in 2008 was wrong.
Both the Supreme Courts decision and Gorsuchs 2008 opinion involved the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which requires that public school systems which take certain federal funds provide a free appropriate public education to certain students with disabilities.
Applying this law to individual students, the Supreme Court acknowledged in its Wednesday opinion in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, is not an exact science. A focus on the particular child is at the core of the IDEA, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the unanimous Supreme Court. The instruction offered must be specially designed to meet a childs unique needs through an ndividualized education program.
But while this process can be difficult, it must provide meaningful educational benefits to disabled students which brings us to Judge Gorsuchs error in a 2008 opinion. In Thompson R2-J School District v. Luke P., a case brought by an autistic student whose parents sought reimbursement for tuition at a specialized school for children with autism, Gorsuch read IDEA extraordinarily narrowly.
Under Gorsuchs opinion in Luke P., a school district complies with the law so long as they provide educational benefits that must merely be more than de minimis.
De minimis is a Latin phrase meaning so minor as to merit disregard. So Gorsuch essentially concluded that school districts comply with their obligation to disabled students so long as they provide those students with a little more than nothing.
All eight justices rejected Gorsuchs approach. IDEA, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, is markedly more demanding than the merely more than de minimis test applied by the Tenth Circuit. Indeed, Roberts added, Gorsuchs approach would effectively strip many disabled students of their right to an education. Roberts went on:
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. For children with disabilities, receiving instruction that aims so low would be tantamount to sitting idly . . . awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1479 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (8)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
While Gorsuch was testifying, the Supreme Court unanimously said he was wrong (Original Post)
Cattledog
Mar 2017
OP
As an aside, I wonder if the justices think Garland was robbed of a confirmation
SticksnStones
Mar 2017
#1
SticksnStones
(2,108 posts)1. As an aside, I wonder if the justices think Garland was robbed of a confirmation
It'd be curious to see if their personal opinions on the Garland matter split politically on what was a purely political move or if they see the event as a tarnishing of a once respected branch of government
hopeforchange2008
(610 posts)2. That's gotta sting!!