In April, U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools. The case centers on what standard students must meet in order to bring claims of disability discrimination at school. At issue is whether students with disabilities must show that schools acted in “bad faith or gross misjudgment” to claim that their rights were violated under the Americans with Disabilities Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
The case was brought by the parents of a Minnesota teenager who has severe epilepsy and needs assistance with everyday activities like walking and toileting. Because her seizures are most frequent in the morning hours, she is unable to attend school before noon. For years, Ava’s parents sought unsuccessfully to have their school district, Osseo Area Schools, provide Ava evening instruction so that she could have a full day of school starting at noon.
While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found that the school district failed to provide a free, appropriate public education (FAPE), violating the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, it dismissed discrimination claims brought under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act.
In their option, the court wrote: “When the alleged ADA and Section 504 violations are ‘based on educational services for disabled children,’ a school district’s simple failure to provide a reasonable accommodation is not enough to trigger liability…Rather, a plaintiff must prove that school officials acted with ‘either bad faith or gross misjudgment.'”
The appeals court determined that Ava “…established a genuine dispute about whether the district was negligent or even deliberately indifferent,” but said “that’s just not enough.” Plaintiffs suing under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act can generally obtain injunctive relief without proving intentional disability discrimination. They can recover compensatory damages by demonstrating that the defendant was deliberately indifferent to their federally protected rights. According to the lawyers for the teen, the Eighth Circuit and four other circuits have erected a more stringent test for children with disabilities who face discrimination in the school setting.
Lawyers for the school argue that all circuits expect students with disabilities to show that schools had an intent to discriminate, even if they may word that expectation differently. They further argue that the “bad faith or gross misjudgment” standard strikes the right balance between the need to defer to the expertise of school officials on educational matters, while still reining in abuses by educators who violate professional standards, deliberately target students with disabilities, or completely ignore their needs.”
Scores of parent advocacy organizations have jointly filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, siding with Ava, highlighting that there is no requirement of “bad faith” or “gross misjudgment” in the ADA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and that this standard has never been applied to similar claims brought outside of of educational settings.
.