Supreme Court Strengthens Protections for Students with Disabilities in Unanimous Ruling

In a landmark decision on June 12, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of Ava Tharpe, a Minnesota student with severe epilepsy, in the case A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools. The Court held that students alleging disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act are subject to the same legal standards as other disability discrimination cases, rejecting the previously applied higher standard of "bad faith or gross misjudgment" in educational contexts.

This ruling marks a significant shift in the legal landscape for students with disabilities, ensuring they have equal protection under federal law and simplifying the process for families seeking educational accommodations.

Ava Tharpe, who suffers from a rare form of epilepsy known as Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome, experiences frequent morning seizures that prevent her from attending school before noon. While her previous school district in Kentucky accommodated her needs by providing evening instruction, the Osseo Area Schools district in Minnesota, where she transferred in 2015, denied her request for similar accommodations. As a result, Ava received fewer instructional hours than her peers.

Ava's family filed a lawsuit against the Osseo Area Schools district, alleging violations of the ADA and Section 504. Lower courts dismissed the lawsuit, requiring plaintiffs to prove "bad faith or gross misjudgment"—a higher standard than typically used in similar cases. The Supreme Court overturned this, asserting that children with disabilities should not face more stringent legal hurdles.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the unanimous Court, emphasized that imposing a higher standard for educational discrimination claims was inconsistent with the plain text of the IDEA, which does not limit or restrict the rights or remedies provided under the ADA and Section 504. The Court vacated the judgment of the Eighth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings.

This landmark ruling harmonizes the legal standards for disability discrimination claims across various contexts, ensuring that students with disabilities are afforded the same protections as individuals in other settings. Disability rights advocates have lauded the decision as a significant victory. Catherine Merino Reisman, a partner at Reisman Gran Zuba LLP, stated, "The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in A.J.T. establishes unequivocally that courts cannot burden school children with a higher standard of proof to vindicate their rights under the ADA and Section 504."

The ruling is expected to simplify the legal path for families seeking educational accommodations for children with disabilities, reinforcing the principle of equal educational opportunities. It also underscores the necessity for school districts to comply with federal disability laws, as failure to do so may result in liability for damages.

This decision aligns with previous Supreme Court rulings that have strengthened the rights of students with disabilities. In Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools (2017), the Court ruled that a student is not required to exhaust procedures under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) before suing for damages under the ADA or Section 504 if the gravamen of the claim is disability discrimination rather than failure to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under the IDEA. Similarly, in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023), the Court held that a student can seek monetary damages under the ADA and Section 504 after settling an IDEA claim.

The Supreme Court's unanimous decision in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools represents a pivotal moment in the advancement of disability rights within the educational system, ensuring that students with disabilities are granted the same legal protections as others, and setting a precedent for future cases involving educational accommodations.