Page:United States Reports 546.pdf/281

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

546US1

70

Unit: $$U7

[09-04-08 12:12:39] PAGES PGT: OPIN

SCHAFFER v. WEAST Breyer, J., dissenting

Garret F., 526 U. S. 66, 68 (1999); Board of Ed. of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist., Westchester Cty. v. Rowley, 458 U. S. 176, 208 (1982). The minimum federal procedural standards that the Act specifies are unrelated to the “burden of persuasion” question. And different States, consequently and not surprisingly, have resolved it in different ways. See, e. g., Alaska Admin. Code, tit. 4, § 52.550(e)(9) (2003) (school district bears burden); Ala. Admin. Code Rule 290–8– 9–.08(8)(c)(6)(ii)(I) (Supp. 2004) (same); Conn. Agencies Regs. § 10–76h–14 (2005) (same); Del. Code Ann., Tit. 14, § 3140 (1999) (same); 1 D. C. Mun. Regs., tit. 5, § 3030.3 (2003) (same); W. Va. Code Rules § 126–16–8.1.11(c) (2005) (same); Ind. Admin. Code, tit. 511, Rule 7–30–3 (2003) (incorporating by reference Ind. Code § 4–21.5–3–14 (West 2002)) (moving party bears burden); 7 Ky. Admin. Regs., tit. 707, ch. 1:340, § 7(4) (2004) (incorporating by reference Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13B.090(7) (Lexis 2003)) (same); Ga. Comp. Rules & Regs., Rule 160–4–7–.18(1)(g)(8) (2002) (burden varies depending upon remedy sought); Minn. Stat. Ann. § 125A.091, subd. 16 (West Supp. 2005) (same). There is no indication that this lack of uniformity has proved harmful. Nothing in the Act suggests a need to fill every interstice of the Act’s remedial scheme with a uniform federal rule. See Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc., 500 U. S. 90, 98 (1991) (citations omitted). And should some such need arise—i. e., if nonuniformity or a particular state approach were to prove problematic—the Federal Department of Edu­ cation, expert in the area, might promulgate a uniform fed­ eral standard, thereby limiting state choice. 20 U. S. C. § 1406(a) (2000 ed., Supp. V); Irving Independent School Dist. v. Tatro, 468 U. S. 883, 891–893 (1984); see also Barn­ hart v. Walton, 535 U. S. 212, 217–218 (2002); NationsBank of N. C., N. A. v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U. S. 251, 256–257 (1995); Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Re­ sources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 842–845 (1984).