Will there ever be a case where a gifted student goes before the Court because the curriculum of their school was dumbed down and s/he is not receiving the education they need?

Could someone please site the source for the diagnosis of the child involved in this case? All of the sources I have found indicate that Gilbert was diagnosed with mild to moderate ADHD.

Is the need for special education considered “favoring” a minority over others? The IDEA federal law enables parents to seek a private placement for a disbled child if the public school system cannot provide an appropriate one. In fact, the public school systems are REQUIRED to do this.

“Special education” by definition is specially designed instruction for any child meeting the eligibility criteria. IDEA does not limit itself to children with “one particular disadvantage.”

The assumption is that by virtue of their special needs, that there will be instances where a public school program designed primariy to meet the needs of typical children cannot provide an appropriate education for certain special needs children, certainly appears reasonable. Hard to imagine that any child is so lucky as to be “favored” in this way due to a disability.

As far as “to an exorbitant degree” – consider for a moment that the child in this case requested reimbursement for private tuition in the amount of $21,819. This was actually $4,678 less than it would have cost the average New York City school to educate him.

Seems like everyone would have come out a winner under this scenario, except due to the instransigence of the district, they prostituted the taxpayers of NY who unwittingly funded the the BOE’s legal fees for the last decade fighting this incredibly justified and modest claim.

Thank God for a wealthy businessman who could have just as easily opted out of the fight, as so many do, but instead stepped up for decades of a principled pursuit for the sake of those who don’t have the same resources, and by that I mean time, energy AND money. What an incredible and selfless service to families who do not have the means to pay attorneys to protect their disabled child’s federal rights when they are violated. He is a true hero.

“per curiam” merely means that the order/opinion was made in the name of the court, not in the name of the individual justices. I’ve seen various opinions issued per curiam, even after argument. Usually the reason is because in the unanimity of the court, the issue turned out to be fairly straight-forward and lots of carefully nuanced opinions wouldn’t have helped. I have even read per curiam opinion with signed dissents.

In this case, it apparently became clear early on in the internal discussion that it was going to be 4-4 and no Justice was likely to be swayed. The end result is no opinion of the court and no precedent is set. Under those circumstances, why write signed opinions?

Paul Joseph,
Of course there were arguments in this case. SCOTUSblog even linked to them. Per Curiams are not only issued for summary reversals, but also are routinely issued for DIGs (I better translate: “Dismiss[als] (for cases)Improvidently Granted)”, and siruations like these, where an opinion is affirmed by an equally divided court.

Unless this is a very unusual per curiam, there were no arguments. It would have an argued date if that were the case, and the entire point of a per curiam is that the court doesn’t hear arguments, but returns a decision at the same time it grants cert. Maybe this is a weird case, but I don’t see anything indicating that.

“Give those whose public schools cannot meet their obligation to provide a free and appropriate education to our children their taxes back to put towards a private education.”

I think this is a great idea, and it would apply to lots of students who aren’t disabled. Sadly, many children are trapped in lousy public schools.