BHB filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, advocating for the rights of special education students in Oregon. We're standing with the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL) to challenge a district court ruling that jeopardizes the future of impact litigation aimed at protecting vulnerable students, including children as young as five- and six-years-old. 

The case centers on Oregon's inadequate "accommodations" for special education students, where many received only one or two hours of instruction per day—blatantly violating federal law under the ADA and IDEA. Although the state passed new legislation claiming to resolve these issues, the reality remains that hundreds of students continue to face shortened school days. Despite this, the district court declared the case moot. 

Our amicus brief, on behalf of multiple chapters of the ACLU, argues that legislative attempts to moot a case mid-stream should not replace the powerful relief provided by an injunction against a state agency. If the court relaxes the stringent mootness standard, it risks allowing state actors to sidestep meaningful change and the establishment of binding precedent—two critical goals of impact litigation. This brief raises novel legal arguments that we hope the court of appeals will adopt. 

Partner Organizations: National Center for Youth Law and ACLU Affiliates:
ACLU of Oregon, ACLU of Northern California, ACLU of Montana, ACLU of Nevada, ACLU of Idaho, The ACLU of Washington, and ACLU of Arizona

Important Documents: 

• Amicus Brief – J.N. v. Oregon Department of Education

Media Coverage: NCYL Case Repository