The Washington Court of Appeals reversed in relevant part, concluding that FERPA does not create individual rights and thus cannot be enforced under section 1983. Reversing in turn, the State Supreme Court acknowledged that FERPA does not give rise to a private cause of action, but reasoned that the nondisclosure provision creates a federal right enforceable under section 1983. RULING: The Supreme Court held that the Family Educational Privacy Rights and Privacy Act (FEPRA) is not enforceable under section 1983. Plaintiff's action was foreclosed, because the relevant FERPA provisions created no personal rights to enforce under section1983.

REASONING: The Court ruled that FEPRA could not form the basis of the lawsuit, because it lacks a private cause of action for damages. Noting that its prior rulings on implied causes of action "may not be models of clarity,"...

any ambiguity in our own opinions."
ANALYSIS: In this case, the Court imposed a significant precedent. Not only does Congress have to demonstrate the intention to benefit individuals, but the statute has to include an "unambiguously conferred right" stated with "explicit rights-creating terms" and "its text must be phrased in terms of the persons benefited." These requirements are applicable also to those statutes written prior to the time the Court dictated the new rules. The Court will not give thought to "the expectation that the enacting Congress had formed" as to how the Court would interpret a statute.

This decision leads to questions regarding whether specific statutes contain the "explicit rights-creating" language in other government provisions, such as No Child Left Behind, Fair Housing Act,…