Scalia Ponders Paid Tuition for the ‘Well-Heeled’
Supreme Court justices appear to favor an interpretation of a federal law that makes it more difficult for parents to get tuition reimbursement for their special-needs children, the New York Sun reports.
At issue is a federal law that requires cities to reimburse parents for private-school tuition if their child can’t receive an appropriate education in the public schools and has “previously received special education” by a public agency. Justices questioned whether the statute required some kind of a stint in the public schools.
The suit was filed by a former Viacom executive, Thomas Freston, after the city refused to pay for tuition of his son, who has attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The child never attended public school.
In oral arguments yesterday, Justice Antonin Scalia questioned whether the intent of the statute was to reimburse parents who would pay for private tuition in any event. “There are a lot of parents who are going to send their children to private school no matter what,” he said. “They are well-heeled and this is just an opportunity to have New York City pay $30,000 of it.”
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy recused himself in the case; the reason was not known. A court official gave “a friendly heads-up” to a courtroom sketch artist, telling her to draw Kennedy before he left the bench, Legal Times reports.
The court has posted transcripts (PDF) of the arguments.
