Image via WikipediaThe feed back on the second installment of the new you be the judge series has been amazing.Some of you though, still seem to think that the way the court decides a case is the only correct answer. The whole point of new law (that which did not come over on the boat from England) like special education law is that we are more in the realm of advanced existential philosophy than we are say contract law. Almost all answers were correct, There is room for many approaches.
The clearest example is how courts disagree on the same set of facts. A previous example we have used here is the series of disagreements over the set of facts in TA, the case that made it to the U S Supreme Court. The hearing officer ruled one way. The district court reversed and ruled the other way. The U S Court of Appeals reversed and ruled the other way, but one of three judges dissented. The Supreme Court affirmed, but three of the nine disagreed. None of them was wrong; special ed law is evolving.
If the ambiguity is frustrating, sorry it is the best we can do. So make sure your tray tables are in their locked position because Wednesday brings part three of this fun new series. Our wild ride continues. Hegel anyone?
No comments:
Post a Comment