	Introduction

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the major federal statute for the education of children with disabilities. IDEA both authorizes federal funding for special education and related services and, for states that accept these funds, sets out principles under which special education and related services are to be provided. The major principles include the following requirements:
States and school districts make available a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to all children with disabilities, generally between the ages of 3 and 21. IDEA has been the subject of numerous reauthorizations; the most recent reauthorization was P.L. 108-446 in 2004. Congress is currently beginning the process of identifying potential issues for the next reauthorization. This report examines the Supreme Court decisions, and selected lower court decisions since July 1, 2005, the effective date of P.L. 108-446 . Definition of Disability

A key component of IDEA is the definition of a child with a disability. IDEA contains detailed requirements for the IEP. Several courts have examined the question of whether all settlement agreements are enforceable in federal court or whether judicial enforcement is limited to agreements reached through dispute resolution or mediation. IDEA, as amended, states in part,
(ii) REIMBURSEMENT FOR PRIVATE SCHOOL PLACEMENT.—If the parents of a child with a disability, who previously received special education and related services under the authority of a public agency, enroll the child in a private elementary school or secondary school without the consent of or referral by the public agency, a court or a hearing officer may require the agency to reimburse the parents for the cost of the enrollment if the court or hearing officer finds that the agency had not made a free appropriate public education available to the child in a timely manner prior to that enrollment. Some courts have found that the child is entitled to compensatory education for the same amount of time that appropriate services were withheld. The Court's decision in Smith v. Robinson was controversial. The parents in Arlington Central School District v. Murphy argued that the language on costs encompassed the payment of expert witness fees.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the major federal statute for the education of children with disabilities. IDEA both authorizes federal funding for special education and related services and, for states that accept these funds, sets out principles under which special education and related services are to be provided. The cornerstone of IDEA is the principle that states and school districts make available a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to all children with disabilities. IDEA has been the subject of numerous reauthorizations; the most recent reauthorization was P.L. 108-446 in 2004. Congress is currently beginning the process of identifying potential issues for the next reauthorization. Some of the issues raised by judicial decisions include the following:
What amount of educational progress is required to meet FAPE standards? What educational benefits are required to be put in an individualized education program (IEP)? What use of seclusion and restraints is allowed (if any) under IDEA? Are all settlement agreements enforceable in federal court or only those reached through dispute resolution or mediation? Is information disclosed in a resolution session confidential? What are the specific rights of a parent of a child with a disability? What are the rights of a noncustodial parent of a child with a disability? Does the Supreme Court's decision in Schaffer v. Weast correctly allocate the burden of proof in IDEA cases? Are compensatory educational services required for the same amount of time that the appropriate services were withheld? Does the Supreme Court's decision in Arlington Central School District v. Murphy correctly deny reimbursement for expert witness fees? Does there need to be more detailed guidance on systemic compliance complaints?
This report examines the Supreme Court decisions, and selected lower court decisions since July 1, 2005, the effective date of P.L. 108-446.