The U.S. Supreme Court sent shockwaves through school districts with its recent unanimous decision that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)'s exhaustion requirement does not prevent plaintiffs from suing directly in court when the relief sought—in this case, compensatory damages—is not available under the IDEA, even when the root of the claim is still the denial of a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

As discussed below, the court's decision in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools has significant implications for school districts, including the likelihood of more, and more costly, litigation in federal courts. But first let's take a step back and (1) explore how the exhaustion requirement served as a defense pre-Perez, and (2) break down the court's ruling.