The Record of Judge Sonia Sotomayor on Critical Legal Rights for Women: Other Issues That Have an Impact Women's Rights: Private Rights of Action

Judge Sotomayor's Legal Record: Other Issues That Have an Impact on Women's Rights

July 2009

Private Rights of Action

The plaintiff in Taylor v. Vermont Dept. of Ed.,[1]was subject to a divorce decree that awarded custody of her daughter to the father, and specifically provided that he had all rights regarding decisions concerning her schooling and her health and safety. However, the decree gave the plaintiff the "right to reasonable information" concerning the daughter's progress in school and her health and safety.[2] She sued to gain access to school records under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Judge Sotomayor wrote the majority opinion, holding that the plaintiff was entitled to obtain the records under IDEA, which has an express cause of action, but not FERPA.

The question of whether the mother was entitled to records under FERPA first required an analysis of whether there was a private right of action under the record-access provision of FERPA under the then recent Supreme Court decision in Gonzaga University v. DOE,[3]which held that there was no such action under the non-disclosure provisions of that Act. Judge Sotomayor noted that several circuits had assumed without discussion that Gonzaga applied to all of FERPA, but she undertook a specific analysis of the record-access provision, which she believed showed that the argument could go either way. Stating that Gonzaga required an "unambiguously conferred right," the court held that there was no private right of action.[4]

The wife of the plaintiff in Roach v. Morse[5] lived in a Vermont nursing home. The plaintiff, William Roach, made a loan of $287,000 to their daughter and son-in-law, and shortly thereafter applied for Medicaid to pay for his wife's nursing home care. Mr. Roach disclosed the loan when applying for Medicaid. In response, Vermont sent him an additional form that asked further questions about the loan. Mr. Roach challenged these questions under 42 U.S.C