WASHINGTON (AP) 鈥 A disability-rights case at the Supreme Court grew unusually heated on Monday, including accusations of lying and references to one side's position being a potential 鈥渇ive-alarm fire.鈥
The appeal comes from a teenage girl with a rare form of epilepsy whose family says some courts have made it too hard to sue public schools that fail to make sure students get what they need to learn.
Her family appealed to the Supreme Court after lower courts blocked their discrimination case despite findings that her Minnesota school hadn鈥檛 done enough to accommodate her.
Their attorney, Roman Martinez, said the district鈥檚 position had shifted to a potential 鈥渇ive-alarm fire鈥 for the disability-rights community.
Instead of defending the lower-court decisions that set a different legal standard to sue schools, they argued that all claims over accommodations for people with disabilities should be held to the higher same standard.
The school district鈥檚 lawyer, Lisa Blatt, pushed back on the idea that their arguments had changed. 鈥淭hey are adding words to our mouth. We never said you should have a double regime,鈥 she said.
At the insistence of Justice Neil Gorsuch, she withdrew the allegation that the other side had lied but held firm to the contention that disability-rights claims should be held to a higher legal standard.
The justices appeared skeptical of that argument, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett calling it a 鈥渟ea change鈥 and questioning whether any lower courts had adopted a similar view.
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June.
