Should Plaintiffs/Parents filing a Federal Complaint through IDEA Section 504 or ADA, be accorded the right to counsel when filing pro se' and/or in forma pauperis

Questions Presented Right to Counsel Preface: IDEA Procedural Safeguards 1415 states: "Any party * shall be accorded the right* to be accompanied and advised by counsel”. Setting a precedent to deny parents the right to counsel through IDEA, who additionally have already been granted in forma pauperis status, is dangerous for this country. If we can not protect our weakest then what does that say? Plaintiffs believe that this is a question that has national importance for the access of low income families and/or families in financial hardship, to be able to access equal justice. Question #1 1. Should Plaintiffs/ Parents filing a Federal Complaint through IDEA Section 504 or ADA, be accorded the right to counsel when filing pro se’ and/or in forma pauperis. 2 Jurisdiction Preface: In the Wilkerman Vs Parma Supreme Court decision in 2007, the court came to a decision that the IDEA law states , “ ANY party aggrieved” included the parents being able to represent their child, as well as having claims for themselves. This is an ‘exception’ to the standard rule. The next sentence of IDEA reads it can be filed in ANY district Court of the United states. This seems to be also another exception to the standard rule, Question #2 2. Can plaintiffs/parents per IDEA law file in ANY district Court of the United States, as to not be heard in a court of the same state in which the complaint is against? . : 3 Individual Immunity Preface: Parents presented a Section 1983 statute claim in this case. This includes but is not limited to, teachers, principals, superintendents, board members, the IEE provider and hearing officers who have documented credibility and impartiality concerns and was found in two State review officers orders. Further, these same government employees/officials under section 1983 are using taxpayer funds from those government agencies for their individual representation, a conflict of interest and theft. Circuit Courts have held split or yielded no decisions with regard to immunity for state employees and officials. The following question holds national significance answering whether or not individual teachers , administrators and/or officers etc. who are wilfully breaking the law and/or obstructing justice should be held individually accountable. Question #3 3. Do any personnel, employees, officers or administrators etc. of the Local Education Agency or State Education Agency have immunity in any or in part of a complaint filed through Section 1983 for IDEA/ ADA/ 504 and/or constitutional violations etc? As a follow up, can those individual defendants utilize taxpayer dollars from the citizens of the LEA or SEA for personal representation and/or retain the same representation? Is the same council a conflict of interest? 4