## Facts

- A.W., a former Jersey City public school student with dyslexia, alleged he was denied a free appropriate public education.
- He sued local school entities and employees and also sued New Jersey Department of Education officials involved in special education oversight.
- He asserted claims under the IDEA and related disability statutes and sought relief through 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of federal special education rights.
- The case reached the court of appeals on the state defendants’ interlocutory appeal from denial of qualified immunity as to the § 1983 claims.

## Issues

1. Whether a plaintiff may use 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to obtain relief for violations of rights created by the IDEA.
2. Whether the IDEA’s detailed administrative and judicial review scheme shows congressional intent to preclude § 1983 enforcement.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on § 1983 claims premised on IDEA violations.

## Decision

- The en banc court reversed the district court’s denial of summary judgment/qualified immunity on the § 1983 claims premised on IDEA violations.
- The court held that § 1983 is not available to enforce IDEA-created rights because the IDEA provides a comprehensive remedial scheme incompatible with § 1983.
- The court rejected prior circuit precedent to the extent it permitted § 1983 actions for IDEA violations.
- The court directed dismissal of the § 1983 claims insofar as they were based on IDEA rights.

## Legal Principles

- A statutory remedial scheme that is comprehensive and incompatible with § 1983 indicates congressional intent to preclude § 1983 as an enforcement mechanism for that statute’s rights.
- The IDEA is a Spending Clause statute with an elaborate administrative dispute-resolution process and specified remedies focused on ensuring appropriate educational services.
- Allowing § 1983 damages actions for IDEA violations would bypass the IDEA’s procedures and limitations and would conflict with Congress’s chosen enforcement structure.
- Within the Third Circuit, IDEA-based claims must proceed through the IDEA’s remedial framework rather than through § 1983.

## Conclusion

The en banc Third Circuit held that the IDEA’s detailed enforcement and remedial provisions foreclose using § 1983 to sue state education officials for IDEA-based violations, reversed the denial of qualified immunity on those § 1983 claims, and repudiated prior circuit law allowing such suits.


A.W. v. Jersey City Pub. Sch., 486 F.3d 791 (3d Cir. 2007) (en banc)