In our present-day education system, technology is an essential, incomparable learning tool for students at all grade levels; and thus, the importance of its accessibility to each and every student cannot be overstated. However, some educational organizations around the United States have failed to provide user-friendly websites to people with disabilities, and the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under the Obama Administration took notice.

In the last year alone, OCR investigated over 350 schools districts for violations of website accessibility for individuals with disabilities.  The OCR resolved the complaints against eleven educational organizations in seven states and one territory for these violations. These investigations were prompted by complaints that these organizations’ websites did not comply with the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the American with Disabilities Act of 1990. In a nut shell, these regulations, which apply to online services and programs, prohibit discrimination of people on the basis their disability and ensures that communications with people with disability are as effective as communications with those without a disability.

Newly elected Missouri Governor Eric Greitens has announced that K-12 education reform will be one of his top priorities.  He has called for more prudent use of public funds, and for a broader range of educational options for parents.  The Missouri General Assembly has answered the call with a slew of bills addressing everything from education savings accounts to technical certification programs in high-schools.  It is too soon to tell which, if any, of the bills will become law, but the sheer volume of “education reform” legislation moving through the process speaks volumes about the general assembly’s appetite for reform. Recent legislative activity includes:

  • Senate Bill 32, sponsored by Sen. Ed Emery (R-Lamar), would create Education Savings Accounts for students with learning, development or physical disabilities.  Sen Emery presented a revised version during a hearing before the Senate Government Reform Committee which would include all students in Missouri.  Beginning on or after January 1, 2017, a taxpayer may make a qualifying contribution to an educational assistance organization and claim a tax credit. Educational assistance organizations must meet certain requirements.  The tax credit is capped at $25 million; funds are administered by the State Treasurer and distributed through education assistance programs that will award the funds to parents of qualified students through a debit account.  Many education groups voiced their oppositions to the measure citing lack of funding for the current foundation formula, lack of financial oversight of the schools receiving the funds, and lack of accountability.  Opponents testified schools receiving funds should be held to the same standards as public schools.

On January 11, 2017, the Supreme Court took up its second case this term dealing with the educational rights of students with disabilities, Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District. The case involves an autistic student, whose parents were not satisfied with his individual educational plan (IEP). The parents placed him in an expensive private school and sought reimbursement from the school district. The lower courts denied their request.

Amidst the flurry of post-election political news and speculation about K-12 education policy over the next four years, supporters of diverse public schools should not overlook two opportunities to garner federal financial support for their efforts. In its last months the Obama administration has set in motion two competitive grant programs designed to promote efforts to encourage racially, ethnically and socioeconomically diverse enrollments in public schools.

Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools is one of two important special education cases the Supreme Court will decide this year.  Fry involves the parents of a student with quadriplegic cerebral palsy who sued the school under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act. In this case, the school refused to allow the student’s service dog to accompany her to classes. After this refusal, the parents pulled the student out of the School District and later sued in federal court in Michigan.

The U.S. Department of Education recently released two reports spotlighting the achievements and challenges of its Office for Civil Rights (OCR). During an event with U.S. Secretary of Education John B. King Jr., former Education Secretary Arne Duncan, and Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon the Department released two reports touting OCR’s achievements.  

What makes a cheerleading uniform, a cheerleading uniform? Stripes? Zigzags? What turns a person in a crop top and skirt into a recognizable cheerleader? These are the questions that the United States Supreme Court will likely address in Star Athletica LLC v. Varsity Brands Inc. (Case No. 15-866), which it granted certiorari on May 2, 2016.

The case started when Varsity Brands, Inc. (“Varsity”) believed that Star Athletica, LLC (“Star”) was selling cheerleading uniforms very similar to Varsity’s. Varsity has multiple copyrights on graphic designs that appear on its cheerleading uniforms and warm ups. Star, however, does not believe that the graphic designs for cheerleading uniforms can be protected under the Copyright Act.

On December 1, 2016, millions of American workers were expecting to become eligible for overtime pursuant to the new Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) overtime regulations enacted by the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”). Employers had prepared to put the new rules in place and some had even preemptively adjusted employee policies and salaries in anticipation of the new rules taking effect. However, on November 22, 2016, in a surprising ruling, U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in Texas blocked the new rules from taking effect by granting a nationwide preliminary injunction which was sought by 21 states and a number of business groups.

Safety pins, confederate flags, pantsuits, red baseball caps. Schools face challenges in balancing, on one hand, teachers’ rights to express themselves through what they wear against, on the other hand, potential school disruption in our post-election environment.

Are there times when public schools may restrict teachers from expressing themselves in the workplace through attire? Without a doubt.

On October 18, 2016, a federal magistrate judge in Illinois issued a recommendation that the Federal District Court deny a motion seeking to deny a transgender

student access to the girl’s locker room.  The School District’s 2013 policy gave transgender students access to whichever restroom facilities most aligned with their gender identity, but did not extend that access to locker rooms.  A transgender student, who identifies as female, filed an administrative complaint alleging Title IX violations with the U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Office for Civil Rights resulting in a resolution agreement called the “Locker Room Agreement.”  This agreement entitled only this particular student to use the girl’s locker room and also included measures for all students to maintain their privacy.