New Jersey’s public advocate is asking the Legislature to place the burden of proof in all special education due process hearings on local school districts. Such action would circumvent a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling strongly supported by the NJSBA.

In Schaffer v. Weast, the court held that the burden of proof “is properly placed upon the party seeking relief,” who are usually the parents of the special education student. The Supreme Court’s decision overturned a 1989 New Jersey state court decision that had placed the burden on school districts whenever parents challenged an Individualized Education Program.

The issue has been addressed by the courts because the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) does not specify whether the parent or the district bears the burden of proof in a special education matter.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Schaffer decision did not indicate if state law or code could shift the burden of proof back to a school. Nonetheless, the New Jersey public advocate believes that a state has such authority and, in a January 2007 report, urged the Legislature to take such action.  

Claims without Merit  NJSBA has communicated to the public advocate about the negative impact of placing the burden of proof back on school districts. According to Association attorneys, shifting the burden would encourage claims without merit, and school districts would have to expend financial and administrative resources to defend themselves.

The public advocate’s January report had concluded that the current burden-of-proof standard under the Schaffer case creates obstacles for parents seeking to enforce their child’s educational rights under the IDEA.

However, the Supreme Court had already broached that issue in Schaffer when it pointed to numerous provisions of IDEA, which obligate schools to safeguard procedural rights of parents and to share information with them.