Dissent
The dissenting justices to FOREST GROVE SCHOOL DISTRICT, PETITIONER case are Justices Souter, Scalia, and Thomas. They respectfully disagree with the fact that the IDEA was amended by congress. The amendment that they specifically name is the amendment of 97 which addresses payment for education of children enrolled in private schools without consent of or referral by the public agency. Theses are some of the questions that the justice has” If the mother did not mean that the homework had to be done, why did she mention it at all, and if Congress did not mean to restrict reimbursement authority by reference to previous receipt of services, why did it even raise the subject?”[1] Theses are all legitimate questions, which I think deserve some answers. The justices also believe that because the child had not had past help for the school district that the provisions to the 1997 amendments would not protect them. The clause says “If the parents of a child with a disability, who previously received special education and related services under the authority of a public agency, enroll the child in a private elementary school or secondary school without the consent of or referral by the public agency.”[2]
No comments:
Post a Comment