SPED HISTORICAL

LAW
Teacher DODIE M. DE CASTRO
SPED Teacher 1

Exclusionary Practices Upheld

1893- Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts upheld
that exclusion from the public schools of a student who
was mentally retarded on the basis that he was too
weak minded to profit from instruction.
1919- Wisconsin Supreme Court also upheld the
exclusion of a student with a form of paralysis (normal
IQ) but whose condition caused him to drool and make
facial contortions. He was excluded because school
officials claimed his physical appearance nauseated
teachers and other students, required an undue amount
of time, and he had negative impact on discipline and
progress of the school.
1934- Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals ruled that the
state statute mandating compulsory attendance for
children 6-18 gave the State Dept. of Ed. the authority
to exclude certain students.

Civil Rights Movement

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Four desegregation cases that were consolidated
and heard as one by U.S. Supreme Court.
Illustrates principle that Federal Constitution as
interpreted by U.S. Supreme Court is supreme law
of land.
Ruling gave comfort and support to civil rights
activists.
Even though, U.S. Constitution does not refer to a
public education, the principles of 5th amendment
(due process) and 14th amendment (equal
protection) of U.S. Constitution have significant

Civil Rights Movement

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Landmark school desegregation case, separate is
NOT equal.
The US Supreme Court ruled that state-sanctioned
segregation solely on the basis of a persons unalterable
characteristics (e.g., race, disability) was unconstitutional.
Central to this ruling was the constitutional guarantee of
equal protection under the law, found in the Fourteenth
Amendment.
States may not deny any person within their jurisdiction
equal protection under the law
Affected many aspects of educational law and procedure
and laid the foundation for future right to education
cases on behalf of students with disabilities.
The basic truth of the ruling was viewed by many to be
equally applicable to those denied equal opportunity

Equal Educational Opportunity

Movement
Wolf v. State of Utah (1969)
One of the first court cases decided in favor
of students with disabilities.
Lawsuit filed on behalf of two children with
mental retardation who had been denied
admission to the public schools. The children
had been enrolled in a private day-care at
their parents expense.
The court in Wolf declared that children
who were mentally retarded were entitled to
a free appropriate public education under the
state constitution.

Equal Educational Opportunity

Movement
Culturally & Linguistically Biased
Testing
Diana v. State Board of Education (1970 &
1973)
-Spanish-speaking student was placed in a
class for the mentally retarded on the basis
of an IQ test administered in English. Courts
ruled that placement in segregated programs
on the basis of culturally biased assessments
was prohibited.
Larry P. v. Riles (1972, 74, 79, & 84)
-In
this
case
the
courts
held
that
standardized IQ tests that had not been

Equal Educational Opportunity

Movement
Mills v. Board of Education (1972)

-Class-action

lawsuit filed on behalf of

children who had been excluded from the
public schools in the District of Columbia
after having been classified as being
behavior problems, having epilepsy, physical
impairments, mentally retardation, emotional
disturbances, and hyperactivity.
-Suit based on 14th Amendment, students
improperly excluded and denied due process.
-The court ruled that the school district was
required to the US Constitution, the DC Code,

Equal Educational Opportunity

Movement
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded
Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania (1972)

Class action lawsuit filed on behalf of all

individuals with mental retardation between the
ages of 6 and 21 who had been excluded from the
public schools. The exclusions were justified on the
basis of four state statutes that relieved the state
of any obligation to educate a child:
certified as uneducable and untrainable
by a school psychologist,
allowed postponement of admission to
any child who had not attained a mental
age of 5,

Equal Educational Opportunity Movement

Pennsylvania
Association
for
Retarded
Children
(PARC)
v.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972)
(Contd)
Dispute settled by a stipulation and
consent agreement between the parties
that was endorsed by the court.
No child with mental retardation, or
thought to be mentally retarded could
be assigned to a special education
program or be excluded from the
public schools without due process.
Pennsylvania had an obligation to
provide all children with mental

Equal Educational Opportunity Movement

Language Minorities
Lau v. Nichols (1974) - A class-action lawsuit was

filed on behalf of Chinese students in the San Francisco

schools system who did not speak English and who had
not been provided with English language instruction.
The US Supreme Court held that the failure to provide
remedial English language instruction to non-Englishspeaking students violated section 601 of the Civil
Rights Act of 1974 and denied the students a
meaningful opportunity to participate in public
education.
The Court held that, as a recipient of federal funds,
the school district was bound by Title IV of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and a Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare regulation that required school
districts to take affirmative steps to rectify language

Legislative Mandates
PL
89-750:
Amendments
to
the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (1966).
Established a program of federal grants to
the states that would assist them in
initiating,
expanding,
and
improving
programs and projects for the education of
children with disabilities.
PL 91-230: Amendments to ESEA
(1970)
Repealed the 1966 law but established a
grant program that had a similar purpose.
The law tried to stimulate the states to

Legislative Mandates
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(1996)
Civil rights legislation that specifically guarantees
the rights of individuals with disabilities. Section
504 effectively prohibits discrimination by any
recipient of federal funds in the provision of
services or employment.
An individual is considered to have a handicap
under section 504 if he or she has a physical or
mental impairment that substantially limits one or
more or the persons major life activities, has a
record of such an impairment, or is regarded as
having an impairment.

Legislative Mandates
PL 93-380 (1974)
By 1974 Congress was dissatisfied with states
progress and was confronted with courts
decisions (PARC v. Penn., 1972; Mills v. DC, 1972).
By enacting this law Congress had 4 outcomes in
mind:
It wanted to enforce the 14th amendment
and equal protection guarantee on behalf
of students with disabilities
Wanted to help states carry out their own
self-imposed duties reflected in their
constitutions and statutes
It wanted to overcome the practices of
total and functional exclusion; legal rights
of students with disabilities

Legislative Mandates
PL 93-380
- The Education Amendments of 1974 Amendments
to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA). Provided funding to a variety of programs
for children who were disadvantaged and for
students with disabilities. Required that each state
receiving federal special education funding
establish a goal of providing full educational
opportunities for all children with disabilities. The
amendment acknowledged:
FAPE,
Procedural safeguards,
LRE,
Fed Funds

Legislative Mandates
PL 94-142, The Education for All
Handicapped Children Act (1975)
FAPE,
Procedural safeguards/Due Process,
LRE,
Nondiscriminatory evaluation and
placement
individualized education program (IEP)
Amended in 1986
PL
99-457
Handicapped
Children
Protection Act: (1986) amendment to
EAHCA: added Part H (infants &

Legislative Mandates
The Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities Act
of 1986 (ITDA)
Part H of law- in 1997, became Part C
Infants and toddlers with disabilities defined as
children birth through age 2 who need early
intervention services because they are experiencing
developmental delays or have a diagnosed physical or
mental condition that puts them at risk of developing
developmental delays.
Early intervention services
developmental services provided at
public supervision designed to meet
cognitive, communication, social
adaptive needs.

are defined as
public expense and
the childs physical,
or emotional, &

Lead agency assumes responsibility for delivering

Legislative Mandates
PL 101-476
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
[IDEA] (1990)

Changed language of law:

person first language, handicap to disability

added students with autism and TBI

were added as a distinct class
entitled to the laws benefits.
required a plan for transition on
every students IEP by age 16.

Legislative Mandates
PL 101-336
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Expanded
civil
rights/non-discrimination
protection for individuals with disabilities in the
public and private sector.
Protected individuals: as defined in Section 504
Employment
discrimination:
prohibits
discrimination against a person with a disability
who is otherwise qualified.
Public services and state/local governments
Public accommodations and services operated
by private entities
Transportation
Telecommunications

Legislative Mandates
PL 105-17
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Amendments of 1997

Restructured the law

Changes in the IEP team and content of the IEP

States must establish a voluntary mediation
system
Added language regarding the discipline of
students.

Recent Federal Involvement

No Child Left Behind Act (2002)
Expanded role of Federal government in public education
by holding SEAs, LEAs, and schools accountable for
producing measurable gains in reading and math.

Presidents Commission on Excellence in

Special Education (2002)
SPED must focus on results rather than process
SPED focus on prevention rather than failure
SPED and Gen. Ed. Must focus on scientifically-based
instruction.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education

Improvement Act of 2004.
Builds on NCLB
Changes in IEP, Discipline, and identification of students
with LD.

Principle of Dual Accommodations

Entitlement Laws: (IDEA) creates
benefits that help the person respond
to disability challenges inherent in the
person. These interventions increase
the likelihood that the person will be
able to accommodate to the demands
a nondisabled world imposes.

Antidiscrimination
Laws:
(504)
requires the nondisabled world to
accommodate to the person who has a
disability.

2-Part

Accommodation:

person

Major Principles of Disability Law

Disabled but not
unable

Priority Based on
Severity

Developmental model:
all can learn and be
educated

Productivity

Independence,
Productivity, & Inclusion
Empowerment
Privacy and
Confidentiality
Consent, Choice, &
Client
Participation
Liberty

Inclusion
Family Integrity and
Unity
Service Coordination
and
Collaboration
Cultural
Responsiveness
Accountability
Prevention and
Amelioration