Championing the Right to Education at the US Supreme Court

In its June 2025 ruling in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, the US Supreme Court handed a unanimous victory to a student who had been denied reasonable accommodations for her disabilities, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act. Although students with disabilities have the right to a free public education that is tailored to their individual needs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and other federal laws, particularly stringent requirements have prevented families from proving discrimination and seeking relief under federal law. Latham has worked to end such barriers.

Led by the firm’s Supreme Court & Appellate Practice Global Chair Roman Martinez, Latham briefed and argued A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools on behalf of Ava Tharpe, a teenage student who suffers from severe epilepsy. Because her seizures are most frequent in the mornings, Ava cannot attend school before noon. For years, Ava’s parents requested that her Minnesota school district, Osseo Area Schools, provide Ava with evening instruction to ensure that her school day was the same length as that of her classmates. The school district declined to provide this accommodation, and Ava’s family sued.

The school district initially prevailed in the lower courts, relying on a longstanding Eighth Circuit precedent requiring children with disabilities to meet a uniquely stringent liability standard when seeking relief for discrimination related to their education under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act. Latham became involved in taking the case to the Supreme Court, which unanimously determined that the Eighth Circuit’s rule was incorrect and affirmed that children with disabilities have the same rights as all other plaintiffs under both statutes. The Supreme Court emphasized the far-reaching impact of its decision, not just for Ava, but also for other children with disabilities.

Following the ruling, Ava’s father, Aaron Tharpe, told CBS News, “Any family with a child who's disabled and who needs an accommodation, if the school district now refuses to provide that accommodation, the law has now changed. It's an equal playing field.”

The Latham team working on this case was profiled in a documentary produced by Bloomberg Law in December 2025.

Our work in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools complements a unanimous victory we secured in the 2023 case Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, also led by Roman Martinez. In that decision, the Supreme Court vindicated the rights of students under the ADA and IDEA, allowing children with disabilities who have been denied a public education to pursue all remedies available to them under federal anti-discrimination law.

"Any family with a child who's disabled and who needs an accommodation, if the school district now refuses to provide that accommodation, the law has now changed. It’s an equal playing field."

Aaron Tharpe, father of client

Miguel Luna Perez, a deaf student, attended Sturgis Public Schools in Michigan for 12 years. During this time, Sturgis failed to provide Mr. Perez with instruction in sign language and other necessary accommodations, violating both the ADA and IDEA. The school also separated Mr. Perez from his classmates and misled his non-English-speaking parents about his academic progress, all of which permanently affected Mr. Perez’s ability to communicate and substantially limited his future job prospects.

Mr. Perez and Sturgis settled an administrative claim filed under the IDEA, granting Mr. Perez compensatory educational relief. But when Mr. Perez filed a separate ADA claim for damages in federal court, the district court and Sixth Circuit refused to let him proceed, holding that Mr. Perez’s IDEA settlement ended his right to bring the ADA claim by failing to exhaust his IDEA remedies.

Representing Mr. Perez, we appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that a plaintiff need not exhaust the IDEA’s administrative processes when seeking remedies under other statutes that the IDEA does not authorize — in this case, money damages under the ADA. Following this decision, Mr. Perez was able to settle his claims for damages under the ADA.

Together, the victories in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools and Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools make it easier for students with disabilities and their families to prove discrimination and ultimately seek relief under federal law.