A fine line in the sand of import to find balance of equities costs yes, expenses no parsing subtleties of word and meaning A claim to need “unambiguous” language with clear notice when the words are there, already just under the surface, the letter of the law breathed with life by the words they wrote that weren’t given weight gravitas by the new court, new believers seeing a piece of stare decisis where feeling for the burden of the defenders of the rights the purpose of the law is lost in parsed words
June 28, 2006 19:36 Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Murphy, 548 U.S. ___ (June 26, 2006) (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-18.pdf)
I fear Justice Breyer has it dead right, in the conclusion of his dissent – "Nothing in the Constitution forbids us from giving significant weight to legislative history. By disregarding a clear statement in a legislative report adopted without opposition in both Houses of Congress, the majority has reached a result no Member of Congress expected or overtly desired. It has adopted an interpretation that undercuts, rather than furthers, the statute's purpose, a "free" and "appropriate" public education for "all" children with disabilities. See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U. S. 105, 133 (2001) (Stevens, J., joined by Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., dissenting) ("A method of statutory interpretation that is deliberately uninformed, and hence unconstrained, may produce a result that is consistent with a court's own views of how things should be, but it may also defeat the very purpose for which a provision was enacted"). And it has adopted an approach that, I fear, divorces law from life. See Duncan, supra, at 193 (Breyer, J., joined by Ginsburg, J., dissenting)."
This decision bars the recovery of fees for experts in IDEA cases. It will have huge effects on advocates, educational consultants, evaluators, and other individuals who assist parents during special education due process hearings.