Document: 484 U.S. 305 108 S.Ct. 592 98 L.Ed.2d 686 Bill HONIG, California Superintendent of Public Instruction, Petitionerv.John DOE and Jack Smith. No. 86-728. Argued Nov. 9, 1987. Decided Jan. 20, 1988. Syllabus In order to assure that States receiving federal financial assistance will provide a "free appropriate public education" for all disabled children, including those with serious emotional disturbances, the Education Handicapped Act (EHA or Act) establishes comprehensive system procedural safeguards designed meaningful parental participation in aspects child's educational placement, an opportunity impartial due process hearing respect any complaints such parents have concerning their right seek administrative review decisions they think inappropriate. If proves unsatisfactory, either local agency may file civil action state court "appropriate" relief. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(2). The Act's "stay-put" provision directs child "shall remain [his her] then current placement" pending completion proceedings, unless agencies otherwise agree. 1415(e)(3). Respondents Doe Smith, who were emotionally disturbed students, suspended indefinitely violent disruptive conduct related disabilities, expulsion proceedings by San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD). After unsuccessfully protesting against him, filed suit Federal Court, which Smith intervened, alleging suspension proposed violated EHA, seeking injunctive relief SFUSD officials petitioner, State Instruction. entered summary judgment respondents on EHA claims issued permanent injunction. Court Appeals affirmed slight modifications. Held: 1. case is moot as respondent Doe, now 24 years old, since limits eligibility children between ages 3 21. However, justiciable continues be eligible services he currently only has not yet completed high school. This jurisdiction there reasonable likelihood again suffer deprivation EHA-mandated rights gave rise this suit. Given evidence unable conform his socially acceptable norms, absence suggestion overcome behavioral problems, it expect engage aggressive classroom misconduct. Moreover, unreasonable suppose future placement so perfectly academic needs further disruptions part are improbable. does repeat objectionable conduct, likely subjected same type unilateral school district enrolled, light lack statewide policy governing responses disability-related misconduct, petitioner's insistence districts retain residual authority exclude dangerous conduct. ponderousness procedures under Act, fact aggrieved student often finished ineligible protections time can had complained "capable repetition, evading review." Thus moot. Pp. 317-323. 2. prohibits authorities from unilaterally excluding growing out disabilities during pendency proceedings. Section 1415(e)(3) unequivocal its mandate "the shall (emphasis added), demonstrates congressional intent strip schools traditionally employed particularly rewrite statute infer "dangerousness" exception basis obviousness inadvertence, since, drafting statute, Congress devoted close attention Mills v. Board Columbia, 348 F.Supp. 866, Pennsylvania Assn. Retarded Children Pennsylvania, 334 1257, 343 279, thereby establishing omission emergency students was intentional. did leave administrators powerless deal implementing regulations allow use normal, nonplacement-changing procedures, temporary suspensions up 10 schooldays posing immediate threat others' safety, while allows interim placements where able agree, authorizes 1415(e)(2) agreement cannot reached. suit, effectively creates presumption favor rebut showing maintaining substantially result injury others. Here, properly balanced respondents' interests officials' safety interest, both lower courts construed applied 1415(e)(3), except insofar held exceeding constitute prohibited change placement. Appeals' modified extent. 323-328. 3. Insofar Court's directing directly failed do so, equally divided Court. P. 328—329. 793 F.2d 1470 (CA9, 1986) affirmed. BRENNAN, J., delivered opinion holdings number 1 2 above, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, JJ., joined. concurring opinion, post, p. ----. SCALIA, dissenting O'CONNOR, joined, Asher Rubin, Francisco, Cal., petitioner. Glen D. Nager, Washington, D.C., amicus curiae, pro hac vice, supporting special Sheila L. Brogna, Legal Services Children, Inc., respondents; Toby F. William J. Taylor, Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, brief. Justice BRENNAN As condition assistance, requires ensure within jurisdictions. aid goal, education judicial disagree. Among these so-called provision, Today we must decide whether, face statutory proscription, nevertheless disabilities. addition, called upon whether may, exercise equitable powers, when fails so. * Act), 84 Stat. 175, amended, 1400 et seq., sought "to handicapped available them . free emphasizes meet unique needs, [and] guardians protected." 1400(c). When law passed 1975, before ample legislative assurances sorely needed: 21 after declared "perhaps most important function governments," Brown Education, 347 483, 493, 74 686, 691, L.Ed. 873 (1954), studies revealed better than half Nation's 8 million services. 1400(b)(3). Indeed, one every eight excluded altogether, 1400(b)(4); many others simply "warehoused" classes neglectfully shepherded through until old enough drop out. See H.R.Rep. 94-332, (1975). poorly served children: Congressional statistics year immediately preceding passage 82 percent went unmet. S.Rep. 94-168, (1975), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 1425 (hereinafter S.Rep.). Although failings resulted funding constraints, recognized problem reflected more resources at levels. Two federal-court decisions, Senate Report characterized "landmark," see id., 6, 1430, demonstrated pursuant statutes rules policies, typically without consultation with, even notice to, parents. 866 (DC 1972); 1257 (ED Pa.1971), 279 (1972) (PARC). EHA's enactment, brought legal challenges similar exclusionary practices 27 other States. S.Rep., 6. 4 responding content itself simple statute. Rather, confers enforceable substantive participating States, Hendrick Hudson Central Dist. Rowley, 458 176, 102 3034, 73 690 (1982),1 conditions State's compliance goals Act. Accordingly, qualify funds develop policies assuring "right education," Secretary formal plans mapping detail programs, timetables effectuate policies. §§ 1412(1), 1413(a). Such that, maximum extent appropriate," "mainstream" i.e., educate disabled, segregate remove regular setting "only nature severity handicap achieved satisfactorily." 1412(5). 5 primary vehicle "individualized program" (IEP), mandates each child. Prepared meetings representative district, teacher, guardians, and, whenever appropriate, child, IEP sets present performance, annual short-term objectives improvements describes specially instruction enable objectives. 1401(19). reviewed necessary, revised least once tailor statutorily required needs. 1414(a)(5). 6 Envisioning centerpiece statute's delivery aware too denied educations way consulting parents, repeatedly emphasized throughout importance indeed necessity development subsequent assessments effectiveness. 1400(c), 1401(19), 1412(7), 1415(b)(1)(A), (C), (D), (E), 1415(b)(2). various guarantee input into affecting These include examine relevant records pertaining identification, evaluation, child; prior written responsible proposes (or refuses) program; aspect agency's education; "an hearing" complaints. 1415(b)(1), (2). 7 At conclusion hearing, court. 1415(c), (e)(2). addition reviewing record, empowered take additional request party "grant [they] determine[ ] appropriate." issue governs lengthy run course. It that: "During conducted [§ 1415], guardian ." 9 dispute grows efforts certain (SFUSD) expel two November 1980, John assaulted another Louise Lombard School, developmental center children. Doe's April 1980 identified him physically awkward 17-year-old experienced considerable difficulty controlling impulses anger. set "[i]mprovement [his] ability relate peers [and to] cope frustrating situations resorting acts." App. 17. Frustrating situations, however, unfortunately prominent feature career: physical abnormalities, speech difficulties, poor grooming habits made target teasing ridicule early first grade, 23; continuing difficulties peers, noting social skills deteriorated could tolerate minor frustration exploding. Id., 15-16. On responded taunts fellow precisely explosive manner anticipated IEP: choked sufficient force abrasions neck, kicked window being escorted principal's office afterwards. 208. admitted misconduct subsequently five days. Thereafter, principal referred matter Student Placement Committee (SPC Committee) recommendation expelled. day end, SPC notified mother proposing her permanently therefore extending completed.2 advised she entitled attend 25 planned discuss expulsion. 11 actions letter, host Instructions. Alleging restraining canceling requiring convene meeting. Judge granted requested ordered defendants home tutoring basis; shortly thereafter, preliminary injunction return process. reentered December 15, 51/2 weeks, school-days, initial suspension. 12 Respondent second grade 1976. prepared indicated control verbal outburst[s]" exhibited "[s]evere disturbance relationships adults." 123. Further evaluations been abused infant young despite above average intelligence, extreme hyperactivity low self-esteem. 136, 139, 155, 176. Of particular concern Smith's propensity hostility; evaluator noted reacted stress "attempt[ing] cover feelings self worth behavior[,] primarily provocations." 136. 13 Based evaluations, placed learning His grandparents, believed would September 1979, acceded requests enrolled A.P. Giannini Middle School. February recommended Learning Disability Group, stressing need supervision highly structured environment. 111. Like earlier easily distracted, impulsive, anxious; half-day schedule suggested undertaken trial basis. 112, 115. 14 beginning next year, assigned full-day almost thereafter began misbehaving. met twice grandparents October returning although agreed reduction, apparently never apprised challenge decision procedures. also warned if continued behavior—which included stealing, extorting money making sexual comments female classmates—they him. 14, good threat, suspending days lewd comments. SPC, exclusion SFUSD. case, scheduled extended final disposition matter. 28, counsel protested grounds essentially identical raised cancel program tutoring. chose latter option 10; January 1981, team convened alternative placements. 15 action, obtained intervene series found expulsions indefinite attributable deprived congressionally mandated education, well provided accordance EHA. enjoined taking disciplinary 2- 5-day effecting consent judge barred authorizing changes directed establish compliance-monitoring or, alternatively, enact guidelines Finally, when, individual determined unwilling 16 appeal, Ninth Circuit orders Maher, (1986). Agreeing constitutes "change stay-put no rendered invalid provisions Code permitting arising concluded, fixed 30 fall reach upheld recent amendments suspensions.3 Lastly, portion 17 Petitioner Honig, Instruction,4 claiming construction conflicted several Courts dangerousness exception, compare supra, (case below), Jackson Franklin County Board, 765 535, 538 (CA5 1985); Victoria Bd. Lee County, Fla., 741 369, 374 (CA11 1984); S-1 Turlington, 635 342, 348, n. (CA5), cert. denied, 454 1030, 566, 70 473 (1981), direct ruling intolerable burden State. We certiorari resolve questions, 479 1084, 107 1284, 94 142 (1987), affirm. II 18 outset, address suggestion, oral argument, moot.5 Under Article III Constitution adjudicate actual, ongoing controversies. Nebraska Press Assn Stuart, 427 539, 546, 96 2791, 2796, 49 683 (1976); Preiser Newkirk, 422 395, 401, 95 2330, 2334, 45 272 That parties very much alive filed, judgment, substitute actual controversy requires. Steffel Thompson, 415 452, 459, 10, 1209, 1216, 39 505 (1974); Roe Wade, 410 113, 125, 93 705, 713, 35 147 (1973). believe possibility exist remains justiciable. 19 accordingly, longer benefits 1412(2)(B). clear, therefore, whatever ward State, Tr. Oral Arg. 23, 26, govern services, thus faced resides SFUSD, resident originally " 'capable review.' Murphy Hunt, 455 478, 482, 1181, 1183, 71 353 (1982). EHA,6 disability, little concluding "reasonable expectation," ibid., below. Our cases reveal purposes assessing reinflict given injury, generally assume place risk injury. Los Angeles Lyons, 461 95, 105-106, 103 1660, 1666-1667, 75 675 (1983) (no barring police chokeholds stopped traffic violation offense, resist arrest stopped); U.S., 484, S.Ct., 1184 reason challenging denial pre-trial bail "will position demand bail"); O'Shea Littleton, 414 488, 497, 669, 676, 38 674 (1974) (unlikely discriminatory bond-setting, sentencing, jury-fee violate valid criminal laws). No reluctance, warranted here. inability norms renders "handicapped" meaning 1401(1); 34 CFR 300.5(b)(8) (1987). record replete aggressive, impulsive behavior indeed, acknowledged "Jack's seem beyond control." 152. certainly expect, based history Nor SCALIA suggests dissent, 3, unlikely misbehavior, total tempered system's obligations restrictive environment," 300.552(d) (1987); 1412(5); consult presumably himself, choosing 1415(b). ignoring mandates, Congress' unquestioned desire wrest former determine infra, 15-16, dissent readily respondent's satisfactorily prevent part. Overarching obligations, moreover, inescapable preparation IEP, like effort predicting human behavior, inexact science best. circumstances context precipitated probable should initially regard, matters While litigation, expressly led continue in, violations, defendant authorizing, among things, changes. 247-248. She course injunctions defendants, but Only invoked our jurisdiction, urges us hold suspend representations, petitioner real substantial enrolled. Cf. 106, 1667 (respondent lacked standing because plausibly allege officers persons whom stopped, city "authorized act manner" added)). Certainly, SFUSD's past practice exclusions odds generally, stand defend aberrant behavior.7 22 previously "ponderous," Burlington Massachusetts Dept. 471 359, 370, 105 1996, 2003, 85 385 (1985), taken seven us, amply confirms observation. For obvious reasons, reached adolescence pose well-being Yet, adolescent improperly disciplined Because "a wronged way," 111, 1670, resulting claim surely evade review, turn merits case. 23 language unequivocal. states plainly initiated placement." added). Faced clear directive, asks read inconsistent assumptions: first, thought comment; second, inadvertently remedy oversight. accept premise, decline invitation Petitioner's arguments proceed, suggests, simple, commonsense proposition: intended literally, leads clearly unintended, untenable, meant doing, students; did, deny "self-help," removal accomplished permission last resort, courts. finding systems across country classes. law, largely guided (1972), PARC, involved hard-to-handle students. used measures bar classroom. There, labeled four plaintiffs "behavioral problems," providing F.Supp., 869-870. limited named affected estimated class 12,000 18,000 868-869, 875, exclusions, suspensions, "on discipline." 880. 26 attacked variety ways. regardless 1412(2)(C), definition disturbances. 1401(1). schools, changing over parent's objection completed. Recognizing might prove long tedious, drafters intend operate inflexibly, 121 Cong.Rec. 37412 (1975) (remarks Sen. Stafford), allowed agree one. Conspicuously absent telling decree permitted 'extraordinary circumstances.' 301. Mills, "landmark" conclude intentional; liberty engraft onto create. means what says educators hamstrung. Department observed "[w]hile [child's] changed [during complaint proceeding], preclude using normal dealing endangering themselves others." Comment following 300.513 study carrels, timeouts, detention, restriction privileges. More drastically, poses others, temporarily schooldays.8 authority, disputes, ensures protect promptly removing provides "cooling down" period initiate persuade And truly adamantly refuse permit 10-day respite gives invoke 1415(e)(2), empowers grant 28 contends, availability illusory real, exhaust time-consuming remedies, bound provision's "automatic injunction," F.2d, 1486, schools.9 true normally completed, noted, bypass exhaustion futile inadequate. Robinson, 468 992, 1014, 17, 104 3457, 3469, 746 (1984) (citing cases); 37416 Williams) ("[E]xhaustion practical matter"). redress process, require alone cases, how exigent circumstances. course, rests demonstrate futility inadequacy nothing completely attempting make showing. operates limit powers cannot, enjoin attending makes evils courts, parents' proceedings." 373, 2004 purports pre-empt conferred Brookline Committee, 722 910, 917 (CA1 1983); about power. 29 short, then, cases. himself herself, satisfied enjoining altering interest requirements safe environment students.10 IV below excess placement."11 affirm herein. question well. 31 Affirmed. 32 Chief concurring. 33 I write separately mootness explain why joined Part reconsideration jurisprudence decided rule stages appellate merely filed. doctrine articulated United Munsingwear, 340 36, 104, 36 (1950), Douglas "[t]he established become here reverse vacate remand direction dismiss." 39, 106. followed fairly consistently years. See, e.g., (1975); SEC Medical Human Rights, 404 403, 92 577, 560 (1972). All "very alive," ante, probably supervening events caused majority Therefore, actually holds deprive hear holding, go still relaxing test giving occurred note jurisdiction. implies states, Art. Constitution. There doubt position. 2334; Sibron New York, 392 40, 57, 88 1889, 1899, (1968); Liner Jafco, 375 301, 306, 391, 394, (1964). But seems doubtful earliest discussing mootness, Green, 159 651, 132, 40 293 (1895), premised constitutional constraints; Gray's nowhere mentions III. 37 which—by requirement power—underlies doctrine, review" relied incomprehensible. extends power controversies; lawsuits forced itself, "moot" raise questions capable repetition questions. review," stated Southern Pacific Terminal Co. ICC, 219 498, 55 310 (1911). enunciated pragmatic considerations, mention principle underlying doctrine: "The Interstate Commerce Commission usually (as manifestly bar) consideration ought be, defeated, short term orders, Government carriers chance redress." 515, 283. explained Moore Ogilvie, 394 814, 816, 89 1493, 1494, (1969): resolution reflects federal-state area 'one man, vote' thrust" (citation omitted). 41 Ogilvie mooted election, just Green some earlier. enunciating 42 logical drawn historical unwillingness connected III, attenuated connection overridden strong reasons override it. example. So refusal dismiss voluntarily ceases, advanced stage activity prompted plaintiff City Mesquite Aladdin's Castle, 283, 289, 1070, 1074, 152 (1982); W.T. Grant Co., 345 629, 632, 894, 897, 97 1303 (1953). adopt render supervened Dissents illustrate proposition roughly 150 160 less warranting remain, Taft said ago, word States." spent preparing reading briefs, conferring—are squandered becomes apparent decisional underway presented. To me valuable case—we are, present, bind courts—is abandon altogether relax accuses doing full effect lawsuit, 43 O'CONNOR joins, dissenting. 44 Without expressing views respectfully my correctly acknowledges presents parties. Ante, 601, citing obviously parties, subject concedes receive (EHA). 601. concludes, 601-604. 46 Jurisdiction "exceptional situatio[n]," 109, 1669, (1983), simultaneously occur: '(1) challenged [is] duration fully litigated cessation expiration, (2) expectation complaining again.' (1982) (per curiam), quoting Weinstein Bradford, 423 147, 149, 347, 350 curiam). 47 expectation" again, event "demonstrated probability." 1184; 348. am surprised contention, fraught potential mischief, something 318-319, expects happen probable; shown probability demonstrated. Thus, notes, recite descriptions side ("a 'reasonable expectation' 'demonstrated probability,' 1184). asserts, standards "described disjunctive," 6—evidently believing conjunction "or" accepted usage disjunctive one, "expressing alternative, contrast, opposition," Webster's Third International Dictionary 651 (1981). fact, indicate (3) synonymous, equivalent, substitutive character words phrases [fell precipice [or] cliff] [the off far side] [lessen abate]; (4) correction greater exactness phrasing [these essays, rather rough sketches] king children—[or] legitimate .]." 1585. saying probability" latter, nondisjunctive, senses. Otherwise (and according exegesis), sufficiently recur degree exists higher exists. vote "18 21." A bare six author today's Member understood synonymous. Edgar MITE Corp., 457 624, 662, 11, 2629, 2651, 269 (MARSHALL, dissenting, J.) (using terms interchangeably, "there occasion takeover offer corporation") 48 cited footnote, 319, support novel recurrence avoid mootness. Northern R. Maintenance Way Employes, 481 429, 436, 4, 1841, 1846, 381 railroad union "reasonably likely" find recurring issue. Similarly, Coastal Comm'n Granite Rock 480 572, 578, 1419, 1424, 577 "likely" mining company submit new coastal requirements. 1310 (1981) (defining "of circumstanced probable[;] seeming justify belief expectation[;] probability"). involving press trials, "[i]t reasonably assumed" news organization covering sat court's closure rules. Press-Enterprise Superior Riverside 478 1, 106 2735, 2739, (1986); Globe Newspaper Norfolk 596, 603, 2613, 2618, 248 quarrel, perhaps, accuracy assessment; assessment regarded necessary (1973), "human gestation pregnancy come usual complete," "pregnancy litigation seldom survive stage, denied." Roe, abortion Bolton, 179, 187, 739, 745, 201 election Rosario Rockefeller, 752, 756, 5, 1245, 1249, (1973); Dunn Blumstein, 405 330, 333, 2, 995, 998, 274 differ body accepting recur, parties; dispensing same-party entirely, focusing instead great recurbetween members large ever reaching us. Arguably facts, narrow areas rights, repetition" applies "same party" again. 1183 Weinstein, 348; 4; Illinois Elections Socialist Workers Party, 440 173, 99 983, 991, 59 230 (1979). limited, application extraordinary improbability issue's live controversy. done chosen sum, analysis, asserts case—that "same-party-recurrence" mootness—is significant departure settled law. 50 mode analysis followed, (1) school; behavior; attempt fail action. spends relegates footnote discussion event, depend, briefly alludes second. Neither facts nor extrarecord counsel, them. 51 With school, argument forthrightly conceded "cannot represent ask Petitioners." 23. observed, "look [our case] that." 23-24. pressed, say view, 20-year-old graduated, handicapped, education. 27. perceive leap reenter 52 concludes possibly terminology. Once demonstrable occur, phrase meaning, give wishes fear effective contradiction. pointing out, slim reeds (whatever means) rests. bases determination three observations argument. First, notes pressing lawsuit 1980. suffices observe equivalent active pending; hitherto avoided equating existence lawsuit. Second, observes "as diploma peers." Ibid. undoubtedly advice, hardly "advises [Smith] awaiting outcome pursue degree." Not controversy, conclusive indication sit broaden decisionmaking options, lawfulness acts happened most, occur. 53 reinforced, considers behavior. demonstrably probable, quite unlikely, known causing replicate issues dismisses contingency obligation environment." 321. means, [individualized placement]" best," ibid. implying get wrong. Even assumption, contrary premises wrong mistake time—assigning unrestrictive environment, suspended—rather assigning (though combined correct placement), produce 54 THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins ground, moot, disregard them, prudential "case controversy" be. intuit is. Both doctrines equivalently deep roots common-law understanding, hence disposition. Flast Cohen, 83, 1942, 1950, 947 (1968) (describing illustrations "justiciability" III). relies 1895 293, prudence, (in wrote ) earlier: 56 "[T]he abstract propositions, declare principles affect thing stipulation enlarge power, duty, regard." Pablo Tulare 149 308, 314, 876, 878, 747 (1893) (Gray, 57 peculiar modern lawyer 19th-century explicit peculiarity shared 19th-century, 20th-century, late 1919, dismissing simply: 58 "Considerations propriety, long-established practice, refrain passing constitutionality obliged proper performance function, whose entitle it." Blair 250 273, 468, 470, 63 979. also, Standard Stock Food Wright, 225 540, 550, 784, 786, 1197 (1912); King, 217 524, 534, 594, 868 (1910); Turpin Lemon, 187 51, 60-61, 23-24, (1902); Tyler Judges Registration, 179 405, 409, 206, 208, 252 (1900). lacking adverse is, collusive actions. Cleveland Chamberlain, Black 419, 425-426, (1862); Lord Veazie, How. 251, 254-256, 1067 (1850). explanation ellipsis refer traditional, fundamental limitations referring adopts ("The Power"; "Cases"; "Controversies") virtually reference tradition. ultimate circularity, coming back end tradition, evident statement Field: 60 "By controversies litigants custom protection enforcement prevention, redress, punishment wrongs. Whenever constitution, laws, treaties takes form acting it, case." re Railway Comm'n, 241, 255 (CC ND Cal.1887). 61 M. Farrand, Records Convention 1787, 430 (rev. ed. 1966): 62 "Docr. Johnson moved insert 'this the' 'laws.' "Mr. Madison doubted going extend Constitution, Judiciary Nature. expounding Department. 64 motion Docr. nem: con: supposed constructively nature." 65 inherent Power," U.S.Const., restrains pronouncing settled, nonsurviving died, exists, ceased recur. Where real-life personal stake exist, entertaining declaratory extent: "yet prudential; criterion met, essential court, deficiency presents. 66 assuredly jurisdictional impediment prevents agreeing ignore impediments assertion retention original harm governmental structure restrict received adequate adopted hortatory. 1966 Elementary Secondary 1965, "for purpose assisting initiation, expansion, improvement programs projects children." Pub.L. 89-750, 161, 80 1204. repealed later replaced version 91-230, B contained program. specific guidance funds, grants safeguards. amending form, rejected "merely establish[ing] unenforceable goal school." 37417 Schweiker). Today, Columbia U.S.Dept. Annual Implementation principals consecutive schooldays, Cal.Educ.Code Ann. 48903(a) (West 1978), "extend [expulsion completed]; provided, [it] presence pupil cause danger property disrupting instructional process." 48903(h). amended impose periods infra. 1983, circumstances, schooldays. 48912(a), 48903 Supp.1988). legislature alter exercised incorporated section. 48911(g). Wilson Riles Honig succeeded office. 27-31. appearing presently nonjusticiable. Notwithstanding undisputed California, argues avail affirmatively client system. 337. overstates stringency test. equates probability," cites described disjunctive, ("[T]here probability' recur" added)), numerous Hunt expectations reasonable, probable. (1987) (parties disputes collective-bargaining agreement); (O'CONNOR, ("likely" trigger contested requirement); (1986) ("It newspaper publisher future); (same); Parole Geraghty, 445 388, 398, 100 1202, 1210, (1980) litigant "faces becoming future") (dicta). potentially claims, not, insist, claimant not. Regardless, mathematical precision enroll years, speak louder counsel's momentary equivocation Since vindicate charge, altogether. advises degree. counterintuitive forgo defend. Certainly re-enter Jane unwanted wish abortion. "made mistakes eagerness Smith." Reply Brief According them; insists acted "should interpreted maintain 6-7. espoused Office Civil Rights school-days amount Special Programs, Policy Letter (Feb. 1987), Ed. L.Rep. 211:437 defines placement," suspensions. ambiguity, defer charged monitoring enforcing INS Cardoza-Fonseca, 421, 448, 1207, 1221, 434 comports statute: expulsions; carry objectionable. broad injunction, 1972), short-term, id, Goss Lopez, 419 565, 574-576, 729, 736-737, 725 (suspension works Due Process Clause). erred approved days' duration. 30, single Supp.1988); argues, imposing obstreperous previous remains, define scope violation, express view. reject States' contention discretion Contrary Government's view herself violations rather, consistent weighed relative harms balance tipped decidedly respondent. 222-223. factual determinations conclusion. note, balancing parties' respective interests, complains indulged improper irreparable respondent, escape presumptive violating forcing petition status quo altered. 8, supra.

Category: 1