WASHINGTON, DC – A coalition of national disability rights organizations is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to protect the civil rights of students with disabilities in AJT v. Osseo Area Schools, a landmark case that could determine how disability discrimination claims are handled in schools. In an amicus brief filed this week, these organizations, including The Arc, argue that students with disabilities should not face a higher legal standard when seeking justice for discrimination in schools—one that does not exist in other settings covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504).

“This case is about whether students with disabilities should have to clear a higher legal hurdle to seek justice for discrimination in school, one that doesn’t exist in workplaces, housing, or other settings,” said Shira Wakschlag, Senior Director of Legal Advocacy & General Counsel at The Arc of the United States. “No child should have to fight an uphill battle just to hold their school accountable for discrimination. Schools must be held to the same standards as every other public entity, plain and simple.”

At the heart of the case is a legal standard applied in some courts that makes it much harder for students with disabilities to prove discrimination in school compared to other settings. Under this stricter rule, students must prove that their school acted with “bad faith” or “gross misjudgment,” a standard that does not apply in workplace, housing, or other discrimination claims under the ADA and Section 504.

Decades ago, the Eighth Circuit Court created this higher standard for students in school settings, and since then, several other courts have followed. As a result, countless students with disabilities have had their claims rejected simply because they couldn’t meet this excessive burden of proof. Disability rights advocates argue that this rule contradicts federal disability laws and makes it much harder for students to hold schools accountable when they face discrimination.

“It is imperative that we protect student civil rights under Section 504 and the ADA, for students who have suffered compensable harms from disability discrimination,” said Selene Almazan, Legal Director at the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA). “The legal rule whose demise is sought in this case—the bad-faith-or-gross-misjudgment standard—cannot be squared with the text or purposes of Section 504 and the ADA which undergird protections for millions of children with disabilities attending K-12 schools.”

Families already struggle to secure the support and services their children need to thrive—this additional legal barrier only makes it harder for them to fight back when their rights are violated.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on April 28, 2025.

Amici curiae include: Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, The Arc of the United States, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Children’s Law Center, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Education Law Center, Learning Rights Law Center, Minnesota Disability Law Center, part of Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, National Center for Youth Law, National Disability Rights Network, National Health Law Project, and the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.

###

About The Arc of the United States: The Arc advocates for and serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), including Down syndrome, autism, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders, cerebral palsy, and other diagnoses. Founded in 1950 by parents who knew their disabled children deserved more, The Arc is now the largest grassroots organization for people with IDD with nearly 600 chapters in 48 states and Washington, DC. Together, we are promoting and protecting the rights of people with disabilities and supporting their inclusion throughout their lives—from education to employment to community living. There are approximately 7.4 million people with IDD in the United States, which encompasses over 100 different diagnoses. Visit www.thearc.org or follow us @TheArcUS to learn more. Editor’s Note: The Arc is not an acronym; always refer to us as The Arc, not The ARC and never ARC. The Arc should be considered as a title or a phrase.

Editor’s Note: You can find the latest news on this lawsuit in this case page. If you need assistance to vote, visit www.fvap.gov.

The Arc of the United States, along with The Arc of Texas, The Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, the Houston Area Urban League, and ArentFox Schiff, today applauded a decision delivered late Friday, Oct. 11, that struck down certain provisions of S.B. 1, an egregious Texas law that sharply limits voting access.

In the decision from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, the judge ruled that several provisions of S.B. 1 that restrict and criminalize voting assistance violate the Voting Rights Act and therefore cannot be enforced.

“This ruling marks a historic victory for voters with disabilities,” said Shira Wakschlag, Senior Director of Legal Advocacy and General Counsel at The Arc of the United States. “The court’s decision demonstrates a deep understanding of S.B. 1’s harmful impact, forcing Texans with disabilities to choose between inadequate voting options or forfeiting their right to vote entirely. The judge’s ruling, influenced by powerful testimony from The Arc’s members, recognizes how S.B. 1 has erected barriers at every stage of the voting process for people with disabilities. Critically, the court understood the far-reaching consequences of S.B. 1, which not only puts care attendants at risk of prosecution but threatens the ability of voters with disabilities to live in the community. The Arc celebrates this landmark decision and remains committed to defending the voting rights of people with disabilities in Texas and nationwide.”

“This victory for voters with disabilities affirms, yet again, what a difference self-advocacy can make,” said Jennifer Martinez, Chief Executive Officer of The Arc of Texas. “I want to thank our members and allies who provided testimony. Without it, the outcome could have been very different, but your willingness to speak up about the unfair barriers you face changed history today.”

“This is a major victory for Texas voters, especially voters with disabilities, voters with low literacy, and voters with limited English proficiency,” said Jennifer A. Holmes, Deputy Director of Litigation at the Legal Defense Fund. “Many of these voters are in Black and Latino communities and face a myriad of obstacles to voting. We are thrilled the court affirmed their right to unfettered assistance to make casting a ballot possible without fear of prosecution of those who assist them.”

“Judge Xavier Rodriguez’s decision in our challenge to Texas Senate Bill 1 is a pivotal victory for democracy and voters who rely on assistance,” said Elsie Cooke-Holmes, National President of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. “While we celebrate this important win, our work is far from over. We urgently need federal legislation, like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act, which enshrines the comprehensive voting rights reforms our democracy desperately needs following the evisceration of those protections in the 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder.”

“The burdens imposed by this law on marginalized communities – specifically voters who could have trouble reading or completing their ballots without assistance – are real and stark,” said J. Michael Showalter, partner at ArentFox Schiff. “The Court heard voluminous testimony as to how the state’s failures to think about how S.B. 1 would work in practice precluded Texans committed to exercise their fundamental right to vote from doing so. We are proud that the Court stepped in and made clear that no one should be criminally prosecuted for providing assistance to voters to allow them to cast their ballots.”

The provisions the Court struck down in Friday’s decision include burdensome disclosure requirements on anyone assisting voters and a ban on compensation for individuals who provide voting assistance. The Court also struck certain language from an oath that Texas law requires assistors to swear under penalty of perjury before they can help voters, a requirement that puts these assistors at risk of criminal prosecution and chills the ability of voters to receive the assistance they need to vote.

The Court ruled that because it is too close to the election to change forms and ballot envelopes, voting assistance disclosures in those materials can still be enforced during the election, but individuals cannot be investigated, prosecuted, or assessed civil penalties related to these requirements. The ruling requires the Secretary of State to stop using the forms after the 2024 election.

Shortly after Texas lawmakers passed S.B. 1 in 2021, the Legal Defense Fund, The Arc of the United States, Reed Smith, and, later, ArentFox Schiff, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., the Houston Area Urban League, The Arc of Texas, and an individual election judge, challenging multiple provisions of the suppressive law. In addition to the provisions restricting voter assistance, the lawsuit also challenged provisions that limited early voting hours, banned 24-hour voting, eliminated drive-thru voting centers, limited multiple drop-off locations for mail ballots, limited the distribution of mail-in ballot applications, imposed burdensome identification requirements on voting by mail, and expanded the authority of partisan poll watchers. Other disability rights and civil rights organizations also challenged the law in companion lawsuits.

Although the Court has yet to rule on all the challenged provisions, it issued prior orders striking down S.B.1’s identification requirements for voting by mail and restrictions on door-to-door canvassing. These rulings have been appealed.

###

Founded in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is the nation’s first civil rights law organization. LDF’s Thurgood Marshall Institute is a multi-disciplinary and collaborative hub within LDF that launches targeted campaigns and undertakes innovative research to shape the civil rights narrative. In media attributions, please refer to us as the Legal Defense Fund or LDF. Please note that LDF has been completely separate from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) since 1957—although LDF was originally founded by the NAACP and shares its commitment to equal rights.

The Arc of the United States advocates for and serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), including Down syndrome, autism, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders, cerebral palsy, and other diagnoses. Founded in 1950 by parents who believed their children with IDD deserved more, The Arc is now a network of nearly 600 chapters across the country promoting and protecting the human rights of people with IDD and actively supporting their full inclusion and participation in the community throughout their lifetimes. Through the decades, The Arc has been at the forefront of advances in disability rights and supports. There are over 7 million people with IDD in the United States, which encompasses over 100 different diagnoses. Visit www.thearc.org or follow us @TheArcUS to learn more. Editor’s Note: The Arc is not an acronym; always refer to us as The Arc, not The ARC and never ARC. The Arc should be considered as a title or a phrase.

Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. was founded on January 13, 1913, by 22 collegiate women at Howard University to promote academic excellence; to provide scholarships; to provide support to the underserved; educate and stimulate participation in the establishment of positive public policy; and to highlight issues and provide solutions for problems in their communities. Since its founding, more than 350,000 women have joined the organization, making it one of the largest predominately Black women’s organizations in the country. Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated has more than 1,050 chapters located throughout the United States and globally. The major programs of the Sorority are based upon its Five-Point Programmatic Thrust, which focuses on Economic Development, Educational Development, International Awareness and Involvement, Physical and Mental Health, and Political Awareness and Involvement. To learn more about Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, visit www.deltasigmatheta.org.

As a champion for underserved and marginalized communities, the Houston Area Urban League has a proud history of delivering impactful, lasting benefits to individuals across Greater Houston, regardless of age, gender, race, ability, or background. Our mission is to empower Black people and other marginalized groups to achieve economic self-reliance, equality, influence, and civil rights. We envision a community where these groups experience true equality in opportunities, justice, and prosperity. HAUL operates seven core programs focused on Education and Youth Development, Workforce and Economic Development, Workforce Training, Housing, Social Justice, Health and Wellness, and Entrepreneurship.

In a new amicus brief, The Arc, Disability Rights Texas, and AAIDD urge Texas court to follow science, not stereotypes

WASHINGTON, DC – In a critical death penalty case, The Arc of the United States, The Arc of Texas, Disability Rights Texas, and the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), along with law firm Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, have filed a “friend-of-the-court” brief urging the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to protect people with intellectual disability from unconstitutional executions.

The group is taking a stand in support of accurate identification of intellectual disability in the case of Blaine Milam, an inmate now on death row. Their message to the court is clear: when it comes to determining who has intellectual disability, courts must refer to clinical standards—not stereotypes.

Shira Wakschlag, Senior Director of Legal Advocacy and General Counsel with The Arc of the United States: “The Arc’s advocacy led to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling more than 20 years ago that bars the execution of defendants with intellectual disability. Yet too often, outdated stereotypes and misconceptions lead to unjust outcomes, particularly in capital cases. We’re fighting to ensure that courts rely on clinical standards to ensure people with intellectual disability are properly identified and protected from execution. The stakes couldn’t be higher.”

Jason Kanterman, an attorney from Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP representing The Arc in this matter, commends The Arc and its team for their efforts in this case: “The Arc, Disability Rights Texas, and AAIDD play a pivotal role in protecting the rights and interests of individuals with intellectual disability and Fried Frank is proud to support these organizations in those efforts.”

The amicus brief comes at a critical time. Despite a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling banning the execution of people with intellectual disability, the practice continues. In Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the special risk of wrongful execution faced by people with intellectual disability and banned their execution as cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. In Hall v. Florida (2014), the Court rejected an arbitrary cutoff for IQ scores in making the intellectual disability determination and emphasized the importance of courts consulting clinical standards in their analysis. In Moore v. Texas (2017 and 2019), the Court strengthened this precedent by emphasizing the need to rely on well-established clinical standards—rather than stereotypes—in making intellectual disability determinations in death penalty cases. The Arc and AAIDD filed amicus briefs in Atkins, Hall, and Moore to educate the Court on the clinical diagnosis of intellectual disability and ensure that the important precedent set in Atkins continues to be strengthened and upheld in jurisdictions around the country.

Maggie Nygren, EdD, Executive Director & CEO of AAIDD: “Twenty-two years post Atkins, people with intellectual disability, particularly people of color, are still vulnerable to wrongful convictions and death sentences. That’s because some states continue to rely on stereotypes rather than clinical standards for determining and defining intellectual disability.”

The amici have deep sympathy for the family and friends of victims in this case and support appropriate punishment of all responsible parties. However, it is critical that courts utilize clinical standards and abide by the Constitution. In Mr. Milam’s case, the State’s expert did not rely on clinical standards for diagnosing intellectual disability. This was after the State’s previous expert used the proper standards, concluding that Mr. Milam is a person with intellectual disability and should not be put to death.

This case in Texas could have far-reaching implications by undermining vital U.S. Supreme Court precedent on cruel and unusual punishment for people with intellectual disability. Executions have become less common as society’s perspectives on the death penalty have shifted. A growing number of states have been responding to these rising concerns by banning or putting a hold on executions. The pressure is mounting on other states to ensure their practices are constitutional.

The Arc and its partners will continue their fight to protect the rights of people with intellectual disability in the criminal justice system, ensuring that the Constitution’s protections extend to all.

###

About The Arc of the United States: The Arc advocates for and serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), including Down syndrome, autism, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders, cerebral palsy, and other diagnoses. Founded in 1950 by parents who believed their children with IDD deserved more, The Arc is now a network of nearly 600 chapters across the country promoting and protecting the human rights of people with IDD and actively supporting their full inclusion and participation in the community throughout their lifetimes. Through the decades, The Arc has been at the forefront of advances in disability rights and supports. There are over 7 million people with IDD in the United States, which encompasses over 100 different diagnoses. Visit www.thearc.org or follow us @TheArcUS to learn more. Editor’s Note: The Arc is not an acronym; always refer to us as The Arc, not The ARC, and never ARC. The Arc should be considered as a title or a phrase.

About The Arc of Texas: The Arc of Texas promotes, protects, and advocates for the human rights and self-determination of Texans with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Follow The Arc of Texas on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and learn more at thearcoftexas.org.

About Disability Rights Texas: Disability Rights Texas is the federally designated legal protection and advocacy agency (P&A) for people with disabilities in Texas established in 1977. Its mission is to help people with disabilities understand and exercise their rights under the law, ensuring their full and equal participation in society. To learn more, visit our website: www.drtx.org.

About the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD): Established in 1876, AAIDD is the oldest and largest professional society in the U.S. concerned with intellectual and developmental disabilities. AAIDD promotes progressive policies, sound research, effective practices, and universal human rights for people with IDD. AAIDD engages its members and the general public through its three highly regarded professional journals, catalog of well-respected books and assessment tools, quality educational programming, and partnerships with other leaders within the disability community to address issues that are important to people with disabilities and their families.  Learn more at www.aaidd.org.

About Fried Frank: Fried Frank’s more than 750 lawyers are located in the key financial and government centers of New York, Washington, DC, London, Frankfurt and Brussels. The firm provides highly commercial guidance on sophisticated transactions, advises some of the largest private equity and asset management firms in the world, and develops effective litigation strategies to address its clients’ most critical challenges. More information can be found at www.friedfrank.com.