refusing to look at regulations accompanying a statute to clarify whether a statute unambiguously conditioned the States’ receipt of federal moneys
How later courts described this case
- refusing to look at regulations accompanying a statute to clarify whether a statute unambiguously conditioned the States’ receipt of federal moneys
- adopting original dissenting panel opinion of Luttig, J.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge,
concurring in the judgment:
For many of the reasons explained in Part I of Judge Luttig’s dissent from the opinion of the panel majority, I do not believe Congress has unambiguously required the states to provide educational services to disabled children who have been suspended or expelled for misconduct unrelated to their disabilities. Accordingly, I join the court’s judgment.