If you're a parent in New York City fighting for your child's special education rights, you probably think your battle ends at the hearing officer or, at most, the State Review Officer (SRO) — the state-level judge who reviews a hearing officer's decision if either side appeals. You're wrong.

The real shadow player in this universe is the Second Circuit Court of Appeals — the federal appeals court that covers New York, Connecticut, and Vermont, and whose rulings are binding law across all three states. And on July 14, 2026 — just days ago — it got a new judge: Matthew Schwartz, Trump's own former personal attorney, who defended him in the appeal of his Stormy Daniels hush-money conviction. He's now one of six Trump appointees on a 13-judge court that quietly shapes how kids with disabilities are treated in courtrooms far beyond New York.

“Over the last decade, our judiciary has drifted into becoming what is essentially an unelected legislature,” said Marc Gottlieb, co-founder of Gottlieb & Wang. “Congress writes laws that are either so vague they're almost meaningless or so poorly drafted that the courts --who interpret these statutes-- have garnered enormous influence.” 

Add to that the fact that many legislators barely understand the systems they're regulating, and you end up with enormous open space for judges to "interpret" the law — which, in practice, means making the rules.

Gottlieb says special education is especially vulnerable to this. “The IDEA — the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the federal law that gives every disabled child the right to a public education designed around their needs — predates this latest era of confusion, but it's still dense with educational jargon, policy judgments, and vague standards,” he said. 

That leaves a lot of room for judges, especially appellate judges — the judges who review a case after a lower court has already ruled, deciding whether that ruling followed the law correctly — to decide what "appropriate" really means, how much deference is owed to school districts, and how high a bar parents have to clear to win.

Now layer on the court-packing reality. Trump came in after Obama left a number of vacancies open. He filled as many as he could, especially on the appellate courts. Biden tried to claw some of that back, but the worry  — if you're a parent of a disabled child — is real.

Several of these judges have professional records — Steven J. Menashi's work rolling back Title IX protections, Park's opposition to race-conscious admissions — that Sen. Dianne Feinstein and civil rights groups pointed to as evidence of hostility toward marginalized populations. Whether that translates into rulings is, so far, unproven; but court observers argue it doesn't have to show up yet to be a legitimate long-term risk.

"They want to starve public systems, but they're not necessarily interested in helping vulnerable kids access private alternatives, either,” said Gottlieb. 

In that context, said Gottlieb, the Second Circuit still matters a lot. It's not as progressive as it once was — none of the circuits are — but it remains enormously influential. “Its decisions are binding in New York, Connecticut, and Vermont, of course. But beyond that, when a federal judge in, say, Tennessee is confronted with a case of first impression — a case raising a legal question that court hasn't had to decide before — they often look to the Second Circuit and ask, "What did they do?"

That's especially true in education. New York generates a disproportionate number of education cases, including special ed disputes. So the Second Circuit, just by volume and expertise, ends up writing the playbook that other courts quietly photocopy.

“Every time the Second Circuit narrows what counts as a Free Appropriate Public Education — FAPE — or blesses a highly deferential standard toward state-level decision-makers like SROs, that logic travels,” he said. 

It shows up in briefs. It gets cited in opinions. And suddenly a parent in another state, who has never heard of the Second Circuit, is losing a case because of what three judges in New York once decided was "reasonable."

“Here’s the reality: when you're fighting your local district over services, you are, in a very real sense, engaged with Second Circuit doctrine and the national judicial culture it helps shape.”

And, said Gottlieb, that's not changing anytime soon.

Six of the Second Circuit's 13 active seats are now held by judges appointed by Donald Trump, across two terms. These are lifetime appointments — once confirmed, a judge holds the seat until they resign, retire, or die. A judge confirmed in their 40s or 50s can easily serve 30 years or more.

The pattern: four of the six seats were vacated by judges originally appointed by Republican presidents — including Livingston, who was herself a reliably conservative vote. So this isn't simply "Trump flipped a liberal court." It's Trump using a wave of Republican-appointee retirements to install more ideologically aligned judges in seats that were already conservative-leaning, while picking up two additional seats from Democratic appointees (Park and Nardini).

Just How Trump Are These Judges?

Matthew Schwartz (confirmed July 14, 2026) — before becoming a judge, he personally represented Trump as his lawyer in the appeal of his Stormy Daniels hush-money criminal conviction. He also separately defended Elon Musk's $50 billion Tesla pay package in court. He went straight from being Trump's personal attorney to a lifetime seat on the court that hears NYC special ed appeals.

Michael Park (confirmed 2019, 52-41) — both of his home-state senators, Schumer and Gillibrand, refused to endorse him, an unusual break from Senate tradition. Schumer called him "an ideologue" on the floor. Park spent his pre-bench career defending the Trump administration's push to add a citizenship question to the census and opposing race-conscious college admissions.

Steven Menashi (confirmed 2019, 51-41) — his confirmation hearing drew bipartisan criticism for stonewalling senators' questions about his record, including his work with Trump advisor Stephen Miller on immigration policy tied to family separation at the border. As DeVos's general counsel at the Department of Education, he helped roll back Title IX protections for campus assault survivors and wrote a memo using defrauded students' private Social Security data to limit their debt relief — later ruled a Privacy Act violation.

Joseph Bianco (confirmed 2019, 54-42) — like Park, neither home-state senator endorsed him, only the third time in decades a circuit nominee had been confirmed without both blue slips. Criticized mainly for his Federalist Society ties rather than a specific record.

Richard Sullivan (confirmed 2018, 79-16) — comfortably bipartisan. Progressive groups flagged his tough-on-defendants record as a federal prosecutor and district judge, but it drew little serious Senate pushback.

William Nardini (confirmed 2019, 86-2) — the outlier. A career federal prosecutor with a largely apolitical record, nominated with the backing of both Connecticut senators through a bipartisan selection process. Virtually no controversy.

What is the Second Circuit Court of Appeals?
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals is one of 13 federal appeals courts in the U.S., covering New York, Connecticut, and Vermont. It hears appeals from federal district courts in those states — including special education cases that started at a hearing officer or State Review Officer level. As Marc puts it: "The Second Circuit is influential even now... it's not the most progressive — I don't know what is, but it's not as progressive as it used to be. None of the circuits are. But it still makes a lot of law."

What is appellate jurisdiction?
Appellate jurisdiction is a court's legal authority to review and rule on a case that's already been decided by a lower court. Unlike a trial, an appeals court doesn't hear new evidence or witnesses — it reviews whether the lower court applied the law correctly. That's the power the Second Circuit exercises every time it rules on a special education case that's already been through a hearing officer, an SRO, and a federal district court.

The special ed legal sequence:

Impartial Hearing Officer (IHO) — the first stop. A parent files a due process complaint, and an IHO holds a hearing and issues a decision.

State Review Officer (SRO) — either side can appeal the IHO's decision to the SRO, who does a fresh review of the record.

Federal district court — the losing side can then challenge the SRO's decision in federal court (in NY, that's the Southern or Eastern District of New York, etc.).

Second Circuit Court of Appeals — and finally, either side can appeal the district court's ruling to the Second Circuit.

How many judges sit on the Second Circuit?
The Second Circuit has 13 active judgeships. Most cases are decided by a rotating three-judge panel, not the full court. The full court only convenes for rare "en banc" rehearings of especially significant cases.

Is the Second Circuit Court of Appeals pro-Trump?
Not in any way the evidence currently supports. As of mid-2026, 6 of the court's 13 active judges were appointed by Trump across two terms, and 6 by Biden, with 1 remaining Obama appointee — close to an even split. In the four special education cases we reviewed involving a Trump appointee, the outcomes split evenly: two favored parents, two favored school districts, with no dissents recorded. That's too small a sample for a firm conclusion, but it shows no visible partisan pattern.

Why is it a concern that Trump is stocking the court?
Not because any specific ruling has gone against families — the case record doesn't show that. The concern is concentration of power: the IDEA guarantees a "free appropriate public education," but Congress never defined "appropriate" — courts have spent decades filling that in, including the Supreme Court's 2017 gloss requiring "meaningful progress." 

These are lifetime appointments — a judge confirmed in their 40s can shape that definition for 30+ years, answerable to no election. Six of the Second Circuit's 13 seats are now held by one president's picks across two terms, several with direct ties to Trump himself, like Matthew Schwartz, his former personal attorney. That's a lot of unchecked, durable power resting with a small number of people — regardless of how any individual case has broken so far.

Why does a federal appeals court in New York affect special ed cases in other states?
Because when a federal judge elsewhere hits a legal question they haven't faced before, they often look at how other circuits have ruled. Marc explains: "When it's a situation that they haven't encountered before in a different smaller jurisdiction like Tennessee... they'll look to the Second Circuit and say, 'What do they do here?'" 

Since New York generates a disproportionate share of special education litigation, Second Circuit rulings frequently become the default answer other courts follow, even outside its home states.

Photo and illustration credits:

Photo: U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, from Matthew A. Schwartz's May 20, 2026 confirmation hearing (judiciary.senate.gov/committee-activity/hearings/nominations-05-20-2026)

Illustration: Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, 1875 / NYPL Digital Collections (nypl.org/research/research-catalog/bib/b17513732)