Legal Changes to Special Education Video Surveillance: Are Your District’s Forms and Procedures Still Compliant?

Texas Education Code § 29.022 and 19 TAC Chapter 103 establish a detailed process governing who may request surveillance, which settings qualify, response and installation deadlines, notice, operation, retention, confidentiality, access to recordings, reporting, and appeals.

During the 89th Texas Legislature, HB 2 and SB 568 amended Texas Education Code § 29.022, resulting in important changes to the terminology and scope of Texas’s special education video surveillance requirements. Texas school districts that have not reviewed their special education video surveillance procedures since 2025 may be operating under outdated law.

Ready, Set Comply: An Overview of Changes to the Commissioner’s Special Education Rules 

The Texas Education Agency has finalized its updates to the Commissioner’s Rules Concerning Special Education Services (19 TAC Chapter 89, Subchapter AA), and many of the new rules take effect Sunday, October 4, 2026. After months of tracking the proposed language, districts now have the final version and a short window to get ready to comply. 

Backpacks Down, Guardrails Up: Summer AI Policy Planning 

As hallways quiet for summer, school leaders finally have the breathing room to prepare for the next big shift: Artificial Intelligence. While AI offers immense potential for productivity and engagement, it also introduces risks regarding academic integrity, data privacy, and professional judgment. 

Summer is the ideal window to establish clear expectations before the first bell rings in August. Waiting for a “crisis” in the fall may result in inconsistent and reactive decision-making.

Back to Bayside: Lessons from Recent Cases (A Saved by the Bell Special)*

Alright, summer’s over, and it’s time to get back to class! The bell just rang on a couple of special education cases from the Fifth Circuit, and let me tell you, they’re dishing out some serious lessons that even Mr. Belding would appreciate. These two cases, both involving the same Mississippi school district, remind us of a golden rule: if a student’s not making progress, it’s time to call a timeout—or in our case, an ARD committee meeting—to rethink the game plan. 

The Supreme Court Weighs in Again on School Liability Under Section 504 and the ADA Related to Education for Students with Disabilities

Two years ago, when the Supreme Court decided Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, which allows students to sue districts for money damages under Section 504 and the ADA without first exhausting the IDEA administrative procedures, we suggested that the decision might not open the floodgates to significant new liability, because the standard for students to prove discrimination under Section 504 and the ADA is higher than a simple denial of FAPE. The question of how much higher was before the Supreme Court in AJT v. Osseo Area Schools.