Winkelman v. Parma City Sch. Dist.

In Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 127 S. Ct. 1994, 2006 (2007), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that parents are entitled to prosecute IDEA claims pro se on their own behalf for the special education of children. The Court did not address whether parents could pursue such actions pro se on behalf of the rights of their children.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion for the 7-2 Court, with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Kennedy included an affirmation of parental rights:

It is not a novel proposition to say that parents have a recognized legal interest in the education and upbringing of their child. See, e.g., Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-535, 45 S. Ct. 571, 69 L. Ed. 1070 (1925) (acknowledging "the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control"); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399-401, 43 S. Ct. 625, 67 L. Ed. 1042 (1923). There is no necessary bar or obstacle in the law, then, to finding an intention by Congress to grant parents a stake in the entitlements created by IDEA. Without question a parent of a child with a disability has a particular and personal interest in fulfilling "our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities." § 1400(c)(1).

We therefore find no reason to read into the plain language of the statute an implicit rejection of the notion that Congress would accord parents independent, enforceable rights concerning the education of their children. We instead interpret the statute's references to parents' rights to mean what they say: that HN18Go to the description of this Headnote. IDEA includes provisions conveying rights to parents as well as to children.

By writing separately, Justices Scalia and Thomas avoided affirming Pierce and Meyer in favor of parental rights.