Write a Critical Review paper on Students with disabilities enrolled Research

Write a Critical Review on Students with disabilities enrolled at educational institutions at all levels - Research Paper Example On top of that, the lawsuit also alleged that the state of New Jersey had violated its constitutional obligation to oversee the implementation of IDEA requirements at the grassroots; in defense, the state of New Jersey filed a motion to dismiss citing a constitutional challenge to the implementation of the IDEA. According to the state of New Jersey, it was immune to private lawsuits regarding enforcement of the IDEA under the provisions of the Eleventh Amendment but the section of parents were not convinced by this argument. In their earnest search for justice, the section went ahead to seek intervention in defending the constitutionality of IDEA, which was eventually granted to them; in their battle to defend the constitutionality of IDEA, the section fronted two strong arguments as the foundation of their case. In their first argument, the section proposed that the state of New Jersey had accepted the federal IDEA funds that were meant to meet the cost of educating students with disabilities consequently agreeing to act in accordance with the IDEA by relinquishing its sovereign immunity. In the second argument, the section contended that following the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress had in fact genuinely repealed the state sovereign immunity, which the New Jersey was still claiming to have in its argument for a dismissal motion. In accordance with the Rules 12(b) (1) and (b)(6), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the NJDOE and the State officials filed a motion of dismissal of the complaint by arguing that they were immune to the suit under the provisions of the Eleventh Amendment. They also held that the plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and that given the state’s sovereign immunity, it was wrong for an injunctive relief to be entered against it, particularly because it was not the right subject of an order for the provision of free and appropriate public