The following excerpt is from Payan v. L. A. Cmty. Coll. Dist., 19-56111, 19-56146 (9th Cir. 2021):
[3] See, e.g., CG v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Educ., 734 F.3d 229, 236 n.13 (3d. Cir. 2013) (assuming the existence of a disparate impact cause of action in denying plaintiffs' meaningful access challenge to Pennsylvania's school funding formula, but did not decide the issue).
[4] See, e.g., Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (7th Cir. 2018) (stating that disparate impact claims are permissible under the Rehabilitation Act without mentioning the impact of Sandoval).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.