# data[].attributes.body
Please include:

Your name

Name of Court Case or Law

The year the case or law was instituted

The BIG IDEA- try to state this in just a couple words

A brief paragraph summary written in your own words. Include the most important implications of the law as it pertains to individuals with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Fabian Allen

Name of court case: Brown V. Board

Year: 1954

Big Idea: Equal education rights

Brown v. Board of Education was a Supreme Court case decided in 1954. The Court ruled that separating students by race in public schools was unconstitutional because it violated the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law. This decision ended the “separate but equal” rule that was set forth 60 years earlier. Separating students by race. Brown V. Board was also a steppingstone for future laws that protects the rights of students with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
The President's Panel on Mental Retardation (1962)

# data[].attributes.subject
The President's Panel on Mental Retardation (1962)

# data[].attributes.body
Learning Activity Law Summary

Name of Court Case or Law:

The President's Panel on Mental Retardation (1962)

The year the case or law was instituted:

October 17,1961 spending a year to develop a plan that was presented October 16,1962

The BIG IDEA- try to state this in just a couple words

President Kennedy was brought to this as his sister had a disability and his other sister Eunice insisted on him doing something to help. President Kennedy was able to create a panel of not only doctors but those who worked with different disabilities to research the cause, prevention and the treatment of disabilities.

A brief paragraph summary written in your own words. Include the most important implications of the law as it pertains to individuals with disabilities

This opened the door for research and education on disabilities and continues today. However, due to the Vietnam war the financial end collapse for this proposal as the money was needed to fight a war elsewhere. There was a need for research in prenatal, educational and therapeutical needs for people with disabilities, however war was taking vital financial needs. This panel geared towards the rehabilitation and the research of mental disabilities was a corner piece of a realization that there was a need for further needs. Later this was realized that every disability had a need and it needed to cover it all, which forced people of political power to create an umbrella

# data[].attributes.body
𝓷𝓪𝓶𝓮 𝓸𝓯 𝓬𝓸𝓾𝓻𝓽 𝓬𝓪𝓼𝓮: Diana V. Board of Education

𝓎𝑒𝒶𝓇: 1970

𝓑𝓲𝓰 𝓘𝓭𝓮𝓪: Fair Unbiased testing for special education placement.

𝒮𝓊𝓂𝓂𝒶𝓇𝓎:

Diana V. Board of Education (1970) was a court case involving Mexican-American students in California who were placed in special education classes Called EMR (Educable Mentally R-word) base solely on IQ tests given only in English. Many of the students did not speak fluently in English well, so the test results did not accurately measure their abilities. The court ruled that using these tests alone was unfair and discriminating. As a result, schools were required to evaluate students in their primary language and consider their cultural and educational backgrounds before placing them in special education programs. This case helped ensure that students with disabilities are assessed more fairly and are not confused because of language differences.

# data[].attributes.body
Court Case: Larry P. v. Riles

Year: 1971

Big Idea: Culturally Biased & Discriminatory Testing

Summary: This 1971 California-based case created laws that both prohibited and eventually banned the use of IQ tests to place African-American students into special education classes. This case began with 5 African-American students who claimed that they had been wrongly placed into special education classes. They argued that the IQ tests administered were discriminatory and culturally biased; the tests were based mostly on white populations. Additionally, they claimed that the rate at which African-American students were placed into, at the time, called EMR (Educably Mentally Retarded) classes vs the number of African-American students in the school was disproportionate, and therefore, overrepresented.

The court ruled in favor of the students and prohibited the use of IQ tests to place African-American students into EMR classes. Furthermore, in 1986, the court furthered the ruling and banned the use of IQ tests on African-American students who were being considered for any special education classes. This case helped ensure that African-American students were being rightfully placed into special education classes if needed, and would promote development for more fair testing that was inclusive for all cultures.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of Court Case: Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972)

Year Instituted: 1972

The BIG IDEA: Right to free public education for all.

Summary : This court case started because public schools in Pennsylvania were  legally allowed to turn away children who hadn't reached a certain "mental age." PARC sued the state, and the court ruled that schools could no longer block or delay education for children with developmental disabilities.

Thanks to this decision, all children have the right to a free and appropriate public education, no matter what their disability is. It also pushed schools to start teaching  children with disabilities in regular classrooms alongside their peers whenever possible.

# data[].attributes.body
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972)

Year: 1972

Big Idea: Equal Education for All Students

Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia was a court case in 1972 that helped protect the rights of students with disabilities. The court ruled that public schools could not deny students an education because of a disability or because the school did not have enough money. This case required schools to provide appropriate educational services and due process protections for students with disabilities. The decision helped lead to future special education laws and made sure that all children have the right to a free public education regardless of their disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of case: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

Year: 1973

The big idea: Section 504 made discrimination against people with disabilities in federally funded programs, illegal.

Summary: In summary, people with disabilities are not to be treated unfairly, but to have the same opportunities and rights as everyone else. Disabilities should not be treated as a reason for exclusion, barrier, or dismissive. Section 504 is not about lack of ability, but to include everyone with all fairness. The most important implications of this law as it pertains to individuals with disabilities, is that one cannot be denied benefits of any sort, including federal. This includes schools, hospitals, government funding, or any organizations.

# data[].attributes.body
Court Case: Lau v. Nichols

Year: 1974

Big Idea: Equal education for non-English speaking students

Summary: In 1970, 3000 students from China were enrolled and attended San Francisco Unified School District. Accommodations were not made for 1800 students to be successful in school. These 1800 students were placed in only English-speaking classes and English language curriculum. That same year, one of the parents, Kinney Kinmon Lau, and a group of Chinese American students filed a class action lawsuit against the school district. The lawsuit went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court started hearing oral arguments on December 10, 1973. A unanimous ruling was placed in favor of the students on January 21, 1974.

# data[].attributes.body
Kimberly Dorsey

O'Conner vs. Donaldson was in U.S Supreme Court

Year: 1975.

BIG IDEA: mental health law and civil liberties

Summery:

Donaldson file a lawsuit under the 42 U.S.C against Dr. J.B O'Conner the superintendent. Court establishes that a state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous induvial who live safely in freedom even if mentally ill. The most important implication of disability laws is that individuals with disabilities have the right to equal opportunities, education, employment and public life. The law treat disability unfair they have rights like anyone else. The way they treated them to get the law pass is sad and unfair.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of Court Case: Goss v. Lopez

Year the case was instituted: 1975

Big idea: ensuring students have the right to due process

Summary: The ruling from the Goss v. Lopez court case required schools to follow certain procedures before suspending a student. The case gave students the right to due process, meaning they must be informed of the rule or behavior they are accused of breaking and be given the chance to share their side of the story and advocate for themselves before a suspension is made final. This ruling helps make sure disciplinary actions are fair and not based on only one side of the situation. It also acts as a safety net for all students, including those with disabilities, by ensuring they receive fair treatment and the same legal protections as everyone else in the school system. In addition to these protections, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act provides specific safeguards for students with disabilities. Under IDEA, schools must determine whether a student's behavior was related to their disability before certain disciplinary actions can be taken. These protections work together to make sure students with disabilities are not unfairly disciplined and can continue getting the educational services and support they need.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of Court Case or Law: Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142)

Year: 1975

Big Idea: Of this law was that every child, no matter what the severity of their disability, has the legal right to free public education.

Summary: This court case was about an eight year old boy who had cerebral palsy the school district in Cumberland, Rhode Island first agreed to place him a program for special needs students at Emma Pendleton Bradley Hospital. They then revoked and sent him to the Rhode Island Division of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals, which was severely understaffed and underfunded. This transfer would have terminated his public education the parents appealed the schools decision administrative process created by EAHCA. This is how children with different abilities now can get a free education without being secluded from their peers. This made it clear that they deserve the same education as the same education that non-disability child gets.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
children with different abilities education

# data[].attributes.body
Court case: Youngberg V. Romeo

Year: 1982

Big idea: Safety in institutions for individuals with disabilities.

Summary: This court case was about a man named Nicholas Romeo. He had an intellectual disability and was involuntarily committed to a state institution in Pennsylvania. The problem is, he suffered injuries while in this institution that he should not have, so his mother filed a case for damages. She argued that the law was violated because he was supposed to be being taken care of in a place like this, yet he suffered injuries and was not taken care of correctly. In the end the courts did side with Nicholas and believed that he should have been taken care of in the correct conditions. This court case led to a new legal standard that people who are committed against their will one have complete rights for safe conditions, two have freedom and should not be restrained unless absolutely necessary, and three have proper training that ensures the patient has proper care and safety.

# data[].attributes.body
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro (1984)

Year: 1984
Big Idea: School health support

Summary:
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro was a Supreme Court case from 1984 about a student named Amber Tatro. Amber had spina bifida and needed help with a catheter during the school day so she could attend school safely. Her school district did not want to provide that service, but the Court said they had to because it helped her access her education. Since a trained staff member could do it and it did not require a doctor, it counted as a related service instead of a medical service. This case is important because it showed that students with disabilities should not be kept from school just because they need extra health support during the day.

# data[].attributes.headline
PL 99-457: Education for the Handicapped Act Amendments (1986)-Faith Nerby

# data[].attributes.subject
PL 99-457: Education for the Handicapped Act Amendments (1986)-Faith Nerby

# data[].attributes.body
Big Idea: Early intervention for young children with disabilities

This was passed in 1986 and is an amendment to the "Education for the handicapped act." This is a law that was passed to include infants, toddlers and preschool children with disabilities to be eligible to receive services from special education. It provides early intervention services for children at birth to age 3 and also requires states to offer free, appropriate public education for children 3 to 5 years of age. By offering early support a child's future success and development is greatly improved. This law has helped families access these vital services and has strengthened special education in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of Court Case: Honig v. Doe
Year: 1988
BIG IDEA: Student Discipline Rights

Honig v. Doe was a United States Supreme Court case decided in 1988 that strengthened the rights of students with disabilities. The case involved two students with emotional and behavioral disabilities who were suspended indefinitely for behaviors related to their disabilities. The Supreme Court ruled that schools could not unilaterally remove students with disabilities from their educational placement for extended periods without following the procedures outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This decision reinforced the "stay-put" provision, which requires students to remain in their current educational placement during disputes. The case helped ensure that students with disabilities continue to receive educational services and are protected from being excluded from school because of behaviors connected to their disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Timothy W. v. Rochester School District, 1989

Year 1989

BIG IDEA: Right to Education for All

Summary: In 1989, the First Circuit Court ruled in timothy W. v. Rochester School District that public schools cannot deny a free public education to students with severe disabilities, no matter how profound their needs. Timothy W. had multiple disabilities and the district argued he was “uneducable” and didn’t have to be served. The court said that’s not allowed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act requires schools to provide education to all children with disabilities. The most important implication is that “educability” can’t be used as an excuse to exclude students. This case made it clear that every child with a disability, even those with the most severe needs, has a legal right to access school, FAPE, and services. It closed a major loophole and reinforced that inclusion is not optional.

# data[].attributes.body
Name of Court Case/Law: PL 101-336 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Year: 1990

Big Idea: Equal Rights & Accessibility

Summary: The Americans with Disabilities Act is a civil rights law that protects people with disabilities from being treated differently or discriminated against. This law helps make sure individuals with disabilities have equal access to everyday life needs such as jobs, schools, transportation, public places, and other parts of the community. It also requires reasonable accommodations when needed, so people with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else. The ADA was an important law because it supported inclusion, independence, and fair treatment for people with disabilities in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
Subject: Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F. (March 3, 1999)

Big Idea: Allowing children with disabilities to have daily nursing care at public school

Summary: In 1999 the Supreme Court made the decision to require schools to allow one on one nursing services for students with disabilities so that they are able to attend school and be included. Garret F. was a student who was paralyzed from the neck down and was dependent on a ventilator after a motorcycle accident. His school declined to allow Garret to receive nursing care during the school day. After being taken to court, the Supreme Court ruled that if children with disabilities need one on one support from a qualified non-physician, that schools are obligated to be financially responsible during school hours.

# data[].attributes.body
Alisha

2001

A case decided by the supreme court of the US. The court ruled that a professional golfer Casey Martin was entitled to use a golf cart during competitions as a reasonable accommodation under the American disabilities act.

To explain this case in my own words its pretty simple, without the case his disability could've ended or prevented his career. Thankfully it strengthened many peoples disability rights after fighting to do the right thing. Equality is so important and people with disabilities help prove that.

# data[].attributes.body
No Child Left Behind

Year: 2001.

The No Child Left Behind Act was an update to the Elementary second education act. This Act was signed by President George Bush. George Bush signed it officially in 2002.

What is the big idea behind this act?  The big idea behind the No Child Left Behind Act is so that schools start taking accountability through measurable data testing.

The key implications.

Higher expectations: For the first time in history schools were being federally mandated to make sure that students with disabilities were given the same academic standards as other children.

Accountability: Schools were now being required to separate test scores. So they were separating the test scores from children who had disabilities and the children who didn't. This was to prevent low performance scores from being hidden from other school average test scores.

Access to curriculum: To help students with disabilities they were given access to more of the general education curriculum so teachers could help students with disabilities pass standard tests.

1% Cap Rule: About 10% of students with disabilities or other cognitive impairments were given the opportunity to take other testing assessments and help modify standard tests to help them better take tests.

Testing accommodations: The No Child Left Behind Act made sure that testing accommodations could be used. Some things that could be used are text to speech tools or being able to go in a quiet room or having extra time on a test. This act made sure that students with disabilities had these rights if they needed them.

Co-teaching: To make sure that standards are being met and inclusivity is happening in the classroom there is now a push to have co-teaching. Meaning a special education teacher or paraprofessional will work with a general education teacher.

shyanne

# data[].attributes.body
Name of case: Winkelman v. Parma City School District

Year: 2007

The big idea: parents have independent, enforceable rights under IDEA .

Summary: Parents can go to court on their own to challenge a school district if they believe their child isn’t getting the services or support they deserve.

# data[].attributes.body
Christina Wroblewski

Every Student Succeeds Act

2015

Every Student Succeeds Act

2015

Every Student Succeeds act replaced the 2002 No Child Left Behind act. Every student succeeds emphasizes inclusion, and that every student has access to a high-quality education. This also highlights inclusion by requiring most students with disabilities to participate in the same assessments and standards as their peers while still receiving services, support and accommodations. It provides schools with greater flexibility and adaptability to meet students’ diverse needs and a more in-depth view of student success. Every Student Succeeds Act continues to improve achievement gaps but moves away from the outlook of one-size-fits all approach of No child left behind.