About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

54 Colum. J.L. & Soc. Probs. [i] (2020-2021)

handle is hein.journals/collsp54 and id is 1 raw text is: COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF LAW
Volume 54                          Number 1                           Fall 2020
Copyright C 2020 by the Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, Inc.
AND THE LIMITATIONS OF THE IDEA........................................1
In 1975, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) established a
substantive right to free appropriate public education (FAPE) for children with special
needs. Since that time, the right to FAPE has primarily been defined by - and
enforced through - the IDEA's robust set of procedural safeguards and avenues for
private enforcement. However, the Act's emphasis on procedure over substance has
prevented the realization of meaningful educational programming for a significant
number of special needs students. This Note illustrates the fundamental tension
between the IDEA's substantive and procedural goals by contrasting the legislative and
judicial vision of the IDEA with the current state of special education in rural public
Part II gives a general overview of frameworks for policy implementation. Part III
provides a background in the evolution of special education law, with a focus on the role
that courts have played in the development of special education policy. Part IV argues
against the IDEA's proceduralist approach by demonstrating how this approach fails to
account for the challenges faced by rural students at every stage of the special education
process, including eligibility for special education, the formulation and enforcement of
individualized education plans, and the provision of feasible alternatives to students'
initial public school placement. Finally, Part V argues that the current framework for
the provision of special education should be modified to include more effective means for
enforcing students' rights and should incorporate the inclusive schools approach,
which allows for a more substantive, collaborative, and holistic approach to providing
CON   TRA  CTS   .........................................................................................49
In May 2019, the American Law Institute proposed adopting a Restatement of the Law
of Consumer Contracts. In it, the Restatement's Reporters suggested a grand bargain,
which removed the requirement that consumers meaningfully assent to contractual
terms and compensated for this by adding teeth to ex post remedies already available to
consumers.   The proposed Restatement drew    immense criticism  from  consumer
advocates, who argued both that meaningful assent was not disappearing in the
common law, and that the ex post remedies did not go far enough to cure consumer
harms. In the wake of this critique, the draft was shelved for further consideration.
This Note argues that consumer advocates' approach to critiquing the Restatement is
misguided.   Contrary to the position of consumer advocates, the Reporters were
fundamentally correct in identifying the gradual demise of assent as a reality in
consumer contracts. However, this Note acknowledges that ex post review procedures,
such as the application of the unconscionability doctrine, are inadequate mechanisms
for redressing consumer harm.
Instead, this Note argues that consumer groups are better served by focusing on ex
ante regulation of contract design, which would ensure that consumers are presented

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most