The U.S. Supreme Court case Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F., a minor by his mother and next friend, Charlene F., 1998 revolved around the issue of whether or not continuous nursing services for a disabled student were considered "related services" under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The court ruled in favor of Garret F., stating that such services did fall within IDEA's scope as they allowed him to stay in school and receive an education despite his disability. This ruling clarified that schools are required to provide necessary medical services (excluding those from a physician) to ensure students with disabilities have access to public education, reinforcing the principle behind IDEA - equal educational opportunities for all children regardless of their physical or mental abilities.

In the dissenting opinion for Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F., Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Sandra Day O'Connor, argued that the majority's interpretation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was overly broad. They contended that Congress did not intend to require schools to provide continuous one-on-one nursing care as a "related service" under IDEA. The dissenters believed this would place an undue financial burden on school districts, potentially diverting resources away from educational services for other students. They also expressed concern about transforming schools into medical facilities rather than places of learning if such extensive health services were required under federal law.