October Term 2006 · Docket 05-983
Can non-lawyer parents sue in federal court without attorneys?
Parents claim direct rights under disability law. Schools argue common law bars their self-representation.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Andre argued parents should have unlimited pro se rights.
Mr. Bergeron argued the common law rule remains intact.
Mr. Salmons argued Congress granted parents direct rights under the act.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 41-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 41-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-3
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests whether parents can act as their own lawyers in federal court. They seek to bypass the rule requiring attorneys. Schools argue this rule remains valid despite disability statutes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 27, 2007.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
What each side wants
Parents want to litigate their own cases without hiring attorneys.
Schools want to enforce the rule requiring parents to hire lawyers.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
What each side says
Parents argue Congress granted them direct rights under the disability act.
Schools argue the common law rule banning self-representation still applies.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if parents can only seek reimbursement and procedural rights.
Justice Kennedy asked if recognizing parental rights ends the case immediately.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 41-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 41-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-3
Why it matters
This dispute determines whether parents must hire lawyers to protect their children's education. It affects the cost and accessibility of federal court for families. It defines the scope of parental rights in disability law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 41-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 41-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-3
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 15-43 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 15-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-49
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.