Senate approves bill expanding teacher authority to remove disruptive students, includes IEP safeguards

The Senate on March 10 approved Senate File 2428, a measure that expands teachers’ authority to remove students who cause violent or repeated nonviolent disruptions and requires each attendant center to establish a review committee to oversee return-to-classroom decisions. The bill passed on final reading with a recorded vote of 45 ayes and 0 nays.

Sponsor Senator Gruenhagen (Scott) said the bill “is designed for when the appropriate setting may not be in a general ed classroom and to provide another location that student may go to receive their education, to benefit the student.” The bill creates a review committee composed of two peer-selected teachers and an administrative representative (the principal or designee), and allows behavioral interventionists or other mental-health professionals to participate under adopted amendments.

Supporters framed the bill as a response to rising classroom disruptions and threats to teacher safety. Senator Donahue (Linn) said educators need clearer tools and supports to keep classrooms safe and productive, while Senator Evans (Cherokee) and others described a workforce strain in special education and cited survey results showing discipline and behavior concerns among teachers.

Lawmakers also emphasized compliance with federal disability law. Several senators noted that if a student with an IEP is removed from class, the IEP team must promptly meet to determine whether the behavior was related to the disability and adjust supports as necessary; floor amendments were described as critical to preserving IDEA and 504 protections.

Committee and floor amendments — including language allowing mental-health professionals to serve on review committees and clarifying the role of the principal at attendant centers — were adopted. The secretary reported the final vote as 45 ayes and 0 nays and declared the bill passed.

Supporters said the law balances teacher discretion, safety and student rights; opponents were limited on the floor but cautioned about the need for compliance and adequate support services.