The Wrightslaw Way

to Special Education Law and Advocacy

The Wrightslaw Way random header image

Supreme Court: Oral Arguments in Forest Grove v. T. A. & Safford v. Redding

by Wrightslaw

Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court agreed to hear and decide several education cases this term.

In February, the Court issued a surprising unanimous decision in Fitzgerald v. Barnstable Sch. Committee, 555 U. S. ___ (2009). This decision on behalf of a young child who was sexually harassed by an older student clarified that parents may sue school officials under discrimination laws.

Forest Grove School District v. T. A., 08-305

Forest Grove School District v. T. A. is a case about tuition reimbursement for a child with ADHD, learning disabilities and depression. Despite these ongoing problems, the school district did not find him eligible for special education — so he did not receive special education services. More.

The question presented in Forest Grove v. T.A. is whether parents who unilaterally enroll their disabled child in a private school are entitled to tuition reimbursement if the child never received special education from the district.

Oral argument in Forest Grove School District v. T. A. is scheduled for Tuesday, April 28, 2009.

Safford Unified School District v. Redding (08-479)

In 2003, school officials in the Safford School District (AZ) strip-searched a 13-year-old girl on the basis of an uncorroborated “tip.” Another student claimed Savana had “prescription strength” ibuprofen on her person. Savana was an honor student who had no prior history of drug use or discipline problems. No drugs were found.

Oral argument in Safford v. Redding is scheduled for Tuesday, April 21, 2009.

The questions presented are:

1. Whether the Fourth Amendment prohibits public school officials from conducting a search of a student suspected of possessing and distributing a prescription drug on campus in violation of school policy.

2. Whether the Ninth Circuit departed from established principles of qualified immunity in holding that a public school administrator may be liable in a damages lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for conducting a search of a student whom they suspected of possessing and distributing a prescription drug on campus.

For more information about these cases, including links to the decisions, and the unanimous decision from the Supreme Court that allows parents to sue school officials for discrimination, read Supreme Court News at

Print Friendly

Tags:   · · · · · · · · 5 Comments

Leave a Reply

5 Comments on "Supreme Court: Oral Arguments in Forest Grove v. T. A. & Safford v. Redding"

Notify of

Miss Davis
08/01/2009 2:41 pm

Does this supreme court ruling apply to children who have been denied FAPE by a distrct? How do you get district to pay for private school if they are not educating the child in public school?

06/23/2009 11:23 am

How can I go about possibly getting Debbie ‘s permission to quote her in that statement about the regs book. It is so simple and yet as you know so true.

03/29/2009 8:15 pm

Many times parents do not understand the weight of these Supreme Court cases. Once parents comprehend that their children (and they) have actual RIGHTS in the process, they gain confidence. Confidence reduces the need to be confrontational. Calm, professional, confident behavior puts parents on the equal footing that is so essential to true collaboration at special education meetings.

A principal once asked me why I brought the state regulation book to every meeting. I replied that they were the rock on which I stood. He asked how long I was going to stand alone on that… Read more »