## Facts

- Parents of two children with disabilities challenged Minnesota officials and local school districts for denying special-education services to students enrolled in private religious schools.
- Aaron Westendorp, a severely physically disabled child with normal cognitive abilities, required a full-time paraprofessional at school for communication and physical assistance.
- Aaron’s parents sought to enroll him at a private religious school; they could afford tuition but not the cost of a paraprofessional.
- The Edina district (Independent School District No. 273) refused to provide a publicly funded paraprofessional at the religious school and required Aaron to attend public school to receive the aide.
- Minnesota’s then-existing approach had relied on Establishment Clause concerns to bar certain publicly funded services at sectarian schools; later developments undermined that rationale.
- After intervening legal changes, state officials and districts stipulated to an injunction against enforcing the prohibition; one district agreed to provide services to the Peters’ child, but ISD 273 still refused to provide Aaron a paraprofessional at the religious school.
- The district court granted summary judgment to ISD 273 on the federal claims; the parents appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the IDEA permitted ISD 273 to deny a full-time paraprofessional to a child parentally placed in a private religious school when the district offered a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in public school.
2. Whether a district policy or practice that categorically refuses to provide special-education services at private religious schools complies with the IDEA’s requirements for services to parentally placed private-school children.
3. Whether providing some services in certain private-school settings while denying comparable services at religious schools is consistent with IDEA obligations of equitable participation and service allocation.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit reversed the grant of summary judgment for ISD 273 and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held that the district could not satisfy the IDEA through a blanket refusal to provide special-education services to disabled students enrolled in private schools, including religious schools.
- The court concluded that ISD 273’s approach to private-school services did not comply with the IDEA framework governing services for parentally placed private-school students.

## Legal Principles

- When a district makes FAPE available in public school, the IDEA does not require it to pay for the full cost of a child’s private education, including special education and related services, solely because parents voluntarily choose private school.
- Even when parents place a child in private school, districts retain IDEA duties to provide eligible private-school children an equitable opportunity to participate in IDEA-funded services, subject to statutory limits (including proportionate-share concepts).
- A school district may not use a categorical policy to deny special-education services to all disabled students enrolled in private schools, and it must evaluate its obligations under the IDEA in a manner consistent with the statute rather than relying on generalized exclusions.
- Post-Agostini Establishment Clause concerns do not, by themselves, justify a blanket refusal to provide secular special-education services in religious schools where the IDEA otherwise permits such service delivery.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit required reconsideration of the district’s IDEA obligations toward a child parentally placed in a private religious school, holding that the district could not rely on a categorical denial of services and reversing summary judgment for further proceedings consistent with the IDEA.


Peter v. Wedl, 155 F.3d 992 (8th Cir. 1998)