honigvdoe

Honig v Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988)
Two emotionally disturbed children were expelled from school for disruptive and violent behavior related to their disabilities.
 * __Facts:__**

The court entered summary judgment for respondents on their EHA claims and issued a permanent injunction. The Court of Appeals affirmed with slight modifications. Students may not be excluded for disability related behavior. Bill Honig said this decision put an intolerable burden on the State, he argued students who are very violent should be sent home while the EHA proceedings go on. The case went to the Supreme Court. Affirmed 5-4.
 * __Issues/Answers:__**


 * __Basis/Rationale:__**
 * 1) A child with disabilities cannot be excluded from a school because of misbehavior stemming from their disability.
 * 2) The Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA or the Act), 84 Stat. 175, as amended, 20 U.S.C. 1400 //et seq//., Congress sought "to assure that all handicapped children have available to them . . . a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs, [and] to assure that the rights of handicapped children and their parents or guardians are protected."
 * 3) The "stay-put" provision prohibits state or local school authorities from unilaterally excluding disabled children from the classroom for dangerous or disruptive conduct growing out of their disabilities.
 * 4) The Supreme Court ruled schools still have a responsibility to the student during the time of suspension.


 * __Notes:__**

Most important “expulsion” and “stay-put” case. John Doe and Rick Smith were suspended for their violent behavior. Parents were notified but protested because the exact behaviors were specified in each IEP. When no action was taken Doe file in federal district court and then Rick Smith’s grandparents joined in. The court sided with the petitioners and ordered those students be placed back in school and provided home tutoring. Honig the superintendent said this put an intolerable burden on the State and appealed to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts.

The behavior was precisely the explosive manner anticipated by Doe’s Individual Educational Plan. Jack Smith’s school records indicated that he was unable "to control verbal or physical outburst[s]" and exhibited a "severe disturbance in relationships with peers and adults."

An interesting view from the U.S. Supreme Court; “The Court observes that "the preparation of an [individualized educational placement]" is "an inexact science at best," thereby implying that the school authorities are likely to get it wrong.”