The Report provides compelling evidence that African-American, Latino, and children with disabilities bear the brunt of get tough policies. Black children, especially black males, are disciplined more often and more severely than any other minority group. Zero Tolerance policies are having a profound impact on children with special needs. Although the Individuals with Disabilities Act provides protections for children with disabilities, the Project found that in many circumstances, school officials are ignoring the law, and parents and students are unaware of their rights or unable to enforce them. Federal laws provide an incomplete patchwork of legal protections against the imposition of harsh school disciplinary measures.
Many federal courts bend over backward to defer to disciplinary decisions by school officials.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, through its regulations, incorporates a legal standard known as the adverse impact doctrine. Under the adverse impact doctrine, when a racially neutral policy or practice produces a disproportionately harmful impact on students of color, the burden shifts to the school system to justify its policy or practice under a relatively high standard. In 1971, the U. S. Supreme Court adopted the adverse impact doctrine in Griggs v. Duke Power. Because it is often difficult for students and their parents to find attorneys to represent them in court cases, the role of OCR is critically important. Unfortunately, it does not appear that OCR is vigorously applying the adverse impact doctrine in its complaint investigations and findings.