Honig v. Doe (1987)
- Docket
- 86-728
- Decided
- 1987-01-01
Summary
Question: (1) Is a claim brought under the Education of the Handicapped Act moot if the claimant is over the age of 21? (2) Does the "stay-put" provision of the Education of the Handicapped Act prevent a school district from indefinitely suspending a student whose handicap-related misconduct endangered the student and others? Conclusion: Yes and Yes. The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice William J. Brennan, held that since the Act covered individuals from ages 3 to 21, the claim of a 24-year-old who was no longer in school was moot, but that the claim of a 20-year-old was not moot. The Supreme Court further held that the "stay-put" provision of the Education of the Handicapped Act prohibited state or local school authorities from excluding disabled children from the classroom even for dangerous or disruptive conduct resulting from their disabilities. The Supreme Court thereby affirmed the lower court's opinion. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist concurred and wrote separately on the mootness issue. He agreed with the court's determination but emphasized that he would go further in relaxing the test of mootness, particularly when events giving rise to mootness occurred after certiorari was granted. Justice Antonin Scalia filed a dissent which Justice O'Connor joined. He stated that the controversy was moot because it was unlikely that the 20-year-old plaintiff would return to public school.