Justices Side With Disabled Students in Discrimination Suit (1)

Disabled students don’t have a higher burden to prove discrimination than other people with disabilities, the US Supreme Court says.

In a unanimous ruling on Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts rejected the “two-tiered” approach some appellate courts had set for discrimination suits in an educational setting, saying all suits should face the same standard.

Requiring a higher burden makes “it more difficult for disabled schoolchildren to secure the statutory remedies provided by Congress,” Roberts wrote. “That approach is irreconcilable with the unambiguous directive of” the statute.

“Perhaps sensing the likely fate of” what Roberts called an “asymmetric rule,” the district in Minnesota changed course and made new arguments for the first time at the Supreme Court. The justices declined to address those new arguments.

A dispute over whether those arguments were in fact new, or were what the district had been arguing all along, led to an unusually tense moment during oral arguments in April.

Justice Neil Gorsuch chided the district’s attorney after she accused the other side of “lying” about her stance, telling her she should “be more careful with your words” and raising his voice several times.

Evening Instruction

The case was brought by the parents of a teenager girl known in court filings as A.J.T. She suffers from a rare form of epilepsy that, among other things, limits her ability to attend school in the mornings.

Her parents eventually sued the school district after it denied A.J.T. accommodations for evening instruction.

A federal trial court agreed that the school discriminated against A.J.T. in denying that request, and ordered the district to provide her with evening instruction under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

But the parents’ request for money damages under separate disability statutes was denied because of the heightened standard that was imposed.

Children with disabilities and their families “face daunting challenges on a daily basis,” Roberts said. “We hold today that those challenges do not include having to satisfy a more stringent standard of proof than other plaintiffs to establish discrimination.”

The case is A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Independent School District No. 279, U.S., No. 24-249.