[Nfbv-announce] National Federation of the Blind Comments on US Supreme Court Decision Regarding Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

[Chris Walker]

*FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE*

*CONTACT:*

Chris Danielsen

Director of Public Relations

National Federation of the Blind

(410) 659-9314, extension 2330 <(410)%20659-9314>

(410) 262-1281 <(410)%20262-1281> (Cell)

cdanielsen at nfb.org


*National Federation of the Blind Comments on United States Supreme Court
Decision Regarding Individuals with Disabilities Education Act*


*Baltimore (March 23, 2017):* The National Federation of the Blind today
applauded the unanimous decision of the United States Supreme Court in *Endrew
F. v. Douglas County School District*, (Docket No. 15–827).


Mark A. Riccobono, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said:
“While we would have preferred an even stronger ruling, this decision
clearly represents a shift from the paradigm of low expectations that has
led to frustration and failure for so many blind students and their
families. I know the frustration with this paradigm all too well myself, as
both a blind person and a parent of blind children. The National Federation
of the Blind knows that one of the biggest hurdles that students with
disabilities confront is the low expectations too often set for them by
well-meaning but misguided professionals in the education field. The
Supreme Court of the United States has now affirmed that the blind and
other students with disabilities can, and should, be expected to meet
challenges and advance academically. The National Federation of the Blind
stands ready to collaborate with educational administrators, teachers and
parents of blind students to ensure that all blind students receive the
kind of free appropriate public education that the IDEA and the Supreme
Court's new interpretation of it require. At the same time, we will
continue to hold school systems accountable when they fail to meet these
requirements.”


In delivering the unanimous opinion of the High Court, United States Chief
Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in part: “The goals may differ, but every
child should have the chance to meet challenging objectives. This standard
is more demanding than the ‘merely more than de minimis’ test applied by
the Tenth Circuit. … When all is said and done, a student offered an
educational program providing 'merely more than de minimis' progress from
year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all."