Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires a school district to evaluate a student's special needs and to provide the student with an individualized education program (IEP) or an independent educational evaluation. Parents are allowed input into the planning and modification of their child's IEP. Parents can bring a lawsuit against a school district for an alleged failure to provide an IEP.

Disparate Treatment in the Employment of the Disabled

Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) prohibits discrimination in the workplace on the basis of an employee or a job applicant's disability. Specifically, the ADA protects a "qualified individual with a disability." In considering a disparate treatment claim by an employee with a disability, courts seek to determine whether the disabled employee was treated less favorably than other employees who were not disabled.

The Freedom of Speech During Elections

The freedom of speech is "essential to our democratic ideals." A city cannot ban political candidates from mentioning their opponents in a city voter pamphlet. The First Amendment permits candidates--even ones for judicial offices--to speak out on their party membership or affiliation, as well as on their views on political issues. A state appellate court has ruled that a shopping mall cannot ban a political candidate from soliciting petition signatures on mall property.

The Sixth Amendment and Sentencing Guidelines

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a Washington state sentencing scheme was unconstitutional because a sentencing judge could enhance a sentence based on facts that had never been presented to a jury. The Court held that facts often used by a sentencing court to enhance or increase a sentence first had to be proven to a jury in order to guarantee the Sixth Amendment's right to a jury trial. The holding sent shock waves through courts across the nation because the ruling raised many doubts as to the constitutionality of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.

The Freedom of Religion in Prisons

The federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA) says in part that no government shall impose a substantial burden on the religious exercise of anyone confined to a federally-funded government institution, including prisons and jails. RLUIPA requires prisons to accommodate the religions practiced by inmates. The law allows governmental authorities to interfere with religious practices only if they can show a "compelling governmental interest." Often, prison security and discipline have been found to be sufficient reasons to restrict inmates' religious practices.