Minnesota girl with epilepsy wins Supreme Court ruling expected to make disability lawsuits against schools easier
The girl's family says that her school district didn't do enough to make sure she has the disability accommodations she needs to learn, including failing to provide adequate instruction in the evening when her seizures are less frequent.
But lower courts ruled against the family's claim for damages, despite finding the school had fallen short. That's because courts in that part of the country required plaintiffs to show schools used "bad faith or gross misjudgment," a higher legal standard than most disability discrimination claims.
The district, Osseo Area Schools, said that lowering the legal standard could expose the country's understaffed public schools to more lawsuits if their efforts fall short, even if officials are working in good faith.
The family appealed to the Supreme Court, which found that lawsuits against schools should have the same requirements as other disability discrimination claims.
Children with disabilities and their parents "face daunting challenges on a daily basis. We hold today that those challenges do not include having to satisfy a more stringent standard of proof than other plaintiffs," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.
The court rebuffed the district's argument, made late in the appeals process, that all claims over accommodations for people with disabilities should be held to the same higher standard — a potentially major switch that would have been a "five-alarm fire" for the disability rights community, the girl's lawyers said.
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, wrote separately to say he would be willing to consider those arguments at some point in the future, though he didn't say whether they would win.
But Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, saw it differently. Sotomayor wrote in another concurrence that adopting those higher standards more broadly would "eviscerate the core" of disability discrimination laws.
The girl's attorney Roman Martinez, of Latham & Watkins, called Thursday's ruling a win for the family and "children with disabilities facing discrimination in schools across the country." He added that "it will help protect the reasonable accommodations needed to ensure equal opportunity for all."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Shelter worker is mauled to death by two dogs rescued from abuse and fighting ring
A shelter worker was mauled to death by two rescue animals saved from a dog-fighting ring. Clifford Phillips Jr., 57, died this month at Second Chance Animal Alliance in Yalobusha County, Mississippi, during the attack, according to WREG. 'A dog was already in a pen and he was trying to put another dog in there and the other dog tried to run out, and he tried to hold him off with his foot and that dog grabbed his leg, pulled him down. And then the other dog jumped in with him. One of them was a pit, and the other was a pit mixed breed, and they killed him. They got it all on tape down there,' friend Dudley Woods told the outlet. The two dogs that attacked were at the shelter after being taken in a court-ordered seizure in an investigation into abuse and dog fighting, Yalobusha County Sheriff Jermain Gooch told the North Mississippi Herald. Police who responded to the scene had to shoot one dog dead to reach Phillips. He was pronounced dead at the scene. The other dog was euthanized. Phillips had worked at the shelter for two years, according to WREG. 'His quiet and caring demeanor helped him foster a love for animals and he remarked that he often felt more comfortable around his pets than around people, perhaps recalling the time he spent with Eon, his beloved childhood dog,' his obituary read. He had also worked at a bakery and a Piggy Wiggly in recent years, according to the obituary. Phillips loved watching social media videos - including seeing people's reactions to old TV shows and movies when being shown them for the first time. The 57-year-old was a regular attendee at Sylva Rena Baptist Church, his obituary stated. 'Quiet, caring, and unassuming, Cliff never met a stranger. He loved people. Cliff enjoyed meeting people and swapping stories about their past experiences and sharing details of his own,' the obituary stated. 'He will be greatly missed by all who knew and loved him.' It's unclear what led the dogs to launch into their attack. The shelter released a statement in the wake of Phillips' death. 'It has been one week since the death at the shelter of our friend and employee Cliff Phillips,' it read. 'Alongside his family and many friends, we are devastated by this loss. While we cannot address every question or rumor we have seen over this past week, we have cooperated with local officials. 'Please know that we take the safety and security of our volunteers and employees seriously. We are proud of the work we do in our community and will remain vigilant as we continue to do it.' The victim's older brother, Charles, told WREG that his brother loved animals but he wondered if more could have been done. 'I went out and picked his vehicle up and his last paycheck, but she said, 'I'm sorry I have no words for it,' but she said, 'I'm so sorry for your loss and everything,'' Phillips told the station. 'They've always done good. They've took a lot of strays and puppies and stuff from around here and they've always done good with that.'
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The former NBC host blasted the former president's son for a series of media appearances in which he blasted Joe Biden's critics.
Former NBC host Chuck Todd says Hunter Biden isn't doing himself—or Democrats—any favors with his media tour. The wayward member of the Biden family sat down for two interviews—with Andrew Gallaghan's popular Channel 5 podcast last weekend, and then with former Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison on the At Our Table podcast on Tuesday—going off on an expletive-laden rant against his father's detractors and opening up about his alcohol and drug addictions. 'I don't think this does Hunter Biden any good. I don't think this does Joe Biden any good. It certainly doesn't do the Democratic Party any good,' Todd said Friday on his podcast, adding that he's generally an advocate for going to therapy, 'but let's not do it public. Try to deal with your issues amongst yourself.'
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump notches winning streak in Supreme Court emergency docket deluge
President Trump is on a winning streak at the Supreme Court with conservative-majority justices giving the green light for the president to resume his sweeping agenda. Their recent blessing of his firings of more independent agency leaders is the latest example of the court going the administration's way. This White House in six months has already brought more emergency appeals to the high court than former President Biden did during his four years in office, making it an increasingly dominant part of the Supreme Court's work. But as the court issues more and more emergency decisions, the practice has sometimes come under criticism — even by other justices. Trump prompts staggering activity Trump's Justice Department filed its 21 st emergency application on Thursday, surpassing the 19 that the Biden administration filed during his entire four-year term. The court has long dealt with requests to delay executions on its emergency docket, but the number of politically charged requests from the sitting administration has jumped in recent years, further skyrocketing under Trump. 'The numbers are startling,' said Kannon Shanmugam, who leads Paul, Weiss' Supreme Court practice, at a Federalist Society event Thursday. Trump's Justice Department asserts the burst reflects how 'activist' federal district judges have improperly blocked the president's agenda. Trump's critics say it shows how the president himself is acting lawlessly. But some legal experts blame Congress for being missing in action. 'There are a lot of reasons for this growth, but I think the biggest reason, in some sense, is the disappearance of Congress from the scene,' Shanmugam said. In his second term, Trump has almost always emerged victorious at the Supreme Court. The administration successfully halted lower judges' orders in all but two of the decided emergency appeals, and a third where they only partially won. On immigration, the justices allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants and swiftly deport people to countries where they have no ties while separately rebuffing a judge who ruled for migrants deported to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act. Other cases involve efforts to reshape the federal bureaucracy and spending. The Supreme Court allowed the administration to freeze $65 million in teacher grants, provide Department of Government Efficiency personnel with access to sensitive Social Security data, proceed with mass firings of probationary employees and broader reorganizations and dismantle the Education Department. Last month, Trump got perhaps his biggest win yet, when the Supreme Court clawed back federal judges' ability to issue universal injunctions. The most recent decision, meanwhile, concerned Trump's bid to expand presidential power by eviscerating independent agency leaders' removal protections. The justices on Wednesday enabled Trump to fire three members on the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Decisions often contain no explanation Unlike normal Supreme Court cases that take months to resolve, emergency cases follow a truncated schedule. The justices usually resolve the appeals in a matter of days after a singular round of written briefing and no oral argument. And oftentimes, the court acts without explanation. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, two of Trump's three appointees, have long defended the practice. Last year, the duo cautioned that explaining their preliminary thinking may 'create a lock-in effect' as a case progresses. At the Federalist Society event, Shanmugam suggested the court might have more energy for its emergency cases if the justices less frequently wrote separately on the merits docket — a dig at the many dissents and concurrences issued this term. But the real challenge, he said, is the speed at which the cases must be decided. 'It takes time to get members of the court to agree on reasoning, and sometimes I think it's therefore more expedient for the court to issue these orders without reasoning,' he said. 'Even though I think we would all agree that, all things being equal, it would be better for the court to provide more of that.' The frequent lack of explanation has at times left wiggle room and uncertainty. A month ago, the Supreme Court lifted a judge's injunction requiring the Trump administration to provide migrants with certain due process before deporting them to a country where they have no ties. With no explanation from the majority — only the liberal justices in dissent — the judge believed he could still enforce his subsequent ruling, which limited plans to deport a group of violent criminals to the war-torn country of South Sudan. The Trump administration accused him of defying the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the justices rebuked the judge, with even liberal Justice Elena Kagan agreeing. The Supreme Court's emergency interventions have also left lower judges to grapple with their precedential weight in separate cases. After the high court in May greenlit Trump's firings at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the administration began asserting lower courts still weren't getting the message. The emergency decision led many court watchers to believe the justices are poised to overturn their 90-year-old precedent protecting independent agency leaders from termination without cause. But several judges have since continued to block Trump's firings at other independent agencies, since the precedent still technically remains on the books. The tensions came to a head after a judge reinstated fired CPSC members. The Supreme Court said the earlier case decides how the later case must be interpreted, providing arguably their most succinct guidance yet for how their emergency rulings should be interpreted. 'Although our interim orders are not conclusive as to the merits, they inform how a court should exercise its equitable discretion in like cases,' the unsigned ruling reads. Liberals object to emergency docket practices The lack of explanation in many of the court's emergency decisions has frustrated court watchers and judges alike, leading critics to call it the 'shadow docket.' Those critics include the Supreme Court's own liberal justices. 'Courts are supposed to explain things. That's what courts do,' Kagan said while speaking at a judicial conference Thursday. Kagan pointed to the court's decision last week greenlighting Trump's mass layoffs at the Education Department. She noted a casual observer might think the president is legally authorized to dismantle the agency, but the government didn't present that argument. Her fellow liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and, particularly, Ketanji Brown Jackson, have made more forceful criticisms. Jackson increasingly accuses her colleagues of threatening the rule of law. She called one recent emergency decision 'hubristic and senseless' and warned another was 'unleashing devastation.' Late last month, Jackson wrote that her colleagues had 'put both our legal system, and our system of government, in grave jeopardy.' But in Wednesday's decision letting the CPSC firings move forward, the trio were united. Kagan accused the majority of having 'effectively expunged' the Supreme Court precedent protecting independent agency leaders, Humphrey's Executor v. United States, from its records. 'And it has accomplished those ends with the scantiest of explanations,' she wrote. Kagan noted that the 'sole professed basis' for the stay order was its prior stay order in another case involving Trump's firing of independent agency heads. That decision — which cleared the way for Trump to fire NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox and MSPB member Cathy Harris — was also 'minimally (and, as I have previously shown, poorly) explained,' she said. 'So only another under-reasoned emergency order undergirds today's,' Kagan wrote. 'Next time, though, the majority will have two (if still under reasoned) orders to cite.'
