20 U.S.C. § 1654
Intervention authorization in implementation of court orders
A parent or guardian of a child, or parents or guardians of children similarly situated, transported to a public school in accordance with a court order, may seek to reopen or intervene in the further implementation of such court order, currently in effect, if the time or distance of travel is so great as to risk the health of the student or significantly impinge on his or her educational process.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1977–1979 · leading case: United States v. Marion Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Improve Parent Teacher Org., Applicant-Intervenor-Appellant, 590 F.2d 146 (5th Cir. 1979).
United States v. Marion Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Improve Parent Teacher Org., Applicant-Intervenor-Appellant, 590 F.2d 146 (5th Cir. 1979). “IPTO attempts to invoke 20 U.S.C.A. §§ 1654 , 1717 as establishing its right to intervene pursuant to Rule 24(a)(1).”
Cisneros v. Corpus Christi Indep. Sch. Dist., 560 F.2d 190 (5th Cir. 1977). “Citing subsection (1) of Rule 24(a), appellants first argue that they have an unconditional statutory right to intervene under 20 U.S.C.A. §§ 1654 , 1717. Both of those statutes provide that parents of school children “may seek to reopen or intervene in the further…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.