Starting with a constructive critique of legal articles in special education journals concerning transition services under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), this article presents an empirical analysis of relevant judicial rulings for the period 1990–2016 that shows a prevailing prodistrict approach that is not otherwise evident in the prior articles. The findings include an increased frequency of these judicial rulings generally in accord with the trajectory of special education litigation and, more significantly, an approximate 3:1 district–parent ratio in the outcomes of these rulings that, with up-and-down variation, prevails for the entire period. The conclusion is that the time is ripe for an elevated substantive standard for law-based articles in special education journals as well as a continued, but differentiated, rigorous normative standard for transition services.
