Disability Law Commons^™

New Amendments To Resolving Special Education Disputes: Any Good Ideas?, Demetra Edwards

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article first analyzes the state of affairs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), prior to the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, and the affects that the 1997 reauthorization alternative dispute resolution amendments had on special education law. Next, this article will address the appropriateness of the newly enacted negotiation and settlement methods, specifically the resolution session provision, and the benefits and detriments for resolving special education issues using these processes. This article will further discuss the amendments regarding attorneys' fees, and finally the House's failed proposal for voluntary binding arbitration ...

Available Dispute Resolution Processes Within The Reauthorized Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (Ideia) Of 2004: Where Do Mediation Principles Fit In? , Andrea F. Blau

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The Individual Disabilities Education Act of 1997 first offered mediation processes to parents and school systems as an available dispute resolution process. Congress mandated that mediation be made available whenever a due process hearing was filed. The intent was to assist parents and school systems in resolving their differences regarding the educational needs for children with disabilities through increased discussions and collaborative efforts; this would reduce the need for costly and adversarial litigation. Alternative dispute resolution processes have taken an increasingly dominant role within the newly reauthorized IDEIA of 2004, reflecting Congressional promotion of parent and district collaboration for achieving ...

The Anticlassification Turn In Employment Discrimination Law, Brad Areheart

Bradley A. Areheart

The distinction between antisubordination and anticlassification has existed since the 1970s and has been frequently invoked by scholars to advocate for certain readings of antidiscrimination law. The anticlassification principle prohibits practices that classify people on the basis of a forbidden category. In contrast, the antisubordination principle allows classification (or consideration of, for example, race or sex) to the extent the classification is intended to challenge group subordination.

While most scholars writing about antisubordination and anticlassification have done so in the context of equal protection, this Article systematically applies antisubordination and anticlassification values to assess recent developments in employment discrimination law ...