Charter School Wrongly Removed Student 45 Days for Pointing Child-Safe Scissors

What Happened

Student was an eight-year-old child with an emotional disturbance disability attending the Orangevale campus of California Montessori Project, a public charter school. He was placed in a combined second and third grade general education classroom with one-to-one aide support. Student had a history of behavioral incidents throughout the school year, including verbal outbursts and physical aggression toward adults, occurring roughly once a week on average.

On February 11, 2011, Student's class was doing a Valentine's Day art project and every child had been given a pair of small Fiskars children's scissors by the school. Student became upset with a classmate named Z, picked up Z's scissors, and held them horizontally pointed toward Z's neck and chest area while saying Z had "lied on" him. The incident lasted approximately 30 seconds before Student put the scissors down. Student did not strike, cut, or stab anyone. What followed was a prolonged behavioral episode lasting over an hour, during which Student pushed his teacher, chased classmates, and had to be physically restrained. The school suspended Student and ultimately removed him to a non-public school as an Interim Alternate Educational Setting (IAES) for 45 school days, on the grounds that the scissors constituted a dangerous weapon. Parent filed for an expedited due process hearing, arguing that the scissors did not legally qualify as a weapon and that the 45-day removal violated Student's rights under the IDEA.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ found that California Montessori Project was not entitled to remove Student to an IAES for 45 school days because the Fiskars children's scissors did not meet the legal definition of a "dangerous weapon." Under federal law, a dangerous weapon must be capable of causing death or serious bodily injury — meaning a substantial risk of death, extreme physical pain, or protracted disfigurement or impairment. A minor cut or bruise does not qualify.

The ALJ examined the scissors themselves, which were in evidence. The exposed blades were shorter than two and a half inches, dull, and only able to cut through the shearing action of opening and closing. The tips were blunt and rounded. Critically, the way Student was holding the scissors — pinched from the middle with the blades horizontal — made it physically impossible for him to close them and use their cutting function. He never made any stabbing motion toward the other child. The ALJ noted a telling irony: if these scissors qualified as a dangerous weapon simply by existing, then Montessori itself had armed every child in the classroom, making every student theoretically subject to expulsion. The ALJ distinguished this situation from prior cases where students used adult-sized sharp scissors or scissors taken from staff bags — circumstances far more dangerous than school-issued children's art scissors. The bottom line: the scissors were designed to be safe, used in a way that made them even safer, and caused no physical injury whatsoever.

What Was Ordered

1. California Montessori Project was ordered to return Student to his last agreed-upon and implemented educational placement at the Orangevale campus, effective May 2, 2011 (the first day back from spring break).
2. Montessori was ordered to convene an IEP meeting within 10 school days of Student's return, as required by federal regulations governing discipline and placement decisions.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Schools cannot use the 45-day "dangerous weapon" removal unless the object truly meets the legal definition. Federal law defines a dangerous weapon as something capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. Child-safe scissors handed out by the school for an art project do not automatically qualify, no matter how frightening the incident felt to adults in the room.

2. Both the object itself and how it was used must be analyzed together. The ALJ looked at the size, sharpness, and design of the scissors AND the specific way Student held and used them. Parents can challenge a school's weapon determination by presenting evidence about the actual physical characteristics of the object and the specific mechanics of what happened.

3. Schools cannot introduce new evidence or arguments for the first time in a closing brief. Montessori tried to raise claims about the classmate's emotional trauma after the hearing ended. The ALJ refused to consider this. If a school is going to make a serious disciplinary argument, it must present that evidence during the hearing itself.

4. Charter schools must follow all special education laws, including discipline rules. This case is a reminder that public charter schools are public agencies under special education law. Students with disabilities who attend charters have the exact same rights as students at traditional public schools, including the right to challenge improper disciplinary removals through expedited due process hearings.