Dear Federal Education and Civil Rights Leaders, As responsibility for programs serving Deaf and Hard of Hearing students is reassigned within the federal government, I urge your agency to recognize that Deaf education is not simply a special education issue. It is fundamentally a civil rights issue involving language, communication, and equal access to education. For many Deaf children, the greatest barrier is not hearing loss itself, but the lack of full access to language and communication. Hearing children acquire language naturally through constant exposure in their homes, schools, and communities. Many Deaf children do not receive that same access, particularly when educational programs prioritize speech development without ensuring that a child has a fully accessible language. American Sign Language (ASL) is the natural language of the American Deaf community and is the only fully accessible language available to many Deaf children. While various signed systems exist to represent English, they are not languages in their own right and often depend upon proficiency in spoken English. For many Deaf students, ASL provides the direct, complete, and accessible language foundation necessary for cognitive, social, emotional, and academic development. Federal policy should recognize that language access means access to a complete language, not merely access to communication supports or manually coded versions of English. I also urge your agency to recognize the important role of residential schools for the Deaf. Too often, residential placements are viewed as restrictive simply because they are separate from neighborhood schools. However, for many Deaf students, residential schools provide the least restrictive environment because they offer direct access to language, peers, teachers, role models, extracurricular activities, and school life without the constant communication barriers present in many mainstream settings. A Deaf child who spends the school day relying on interpreters, struggling to follow group discussions, eating lunch alone, and lacking meaningful communication with peers may be physically included but educationally and socially isolated. In contrast, a residential school for the Deaf may provide direct communication throughout the day, opportunities for leadership, social belonging, and full participation in academic and extracurricular activities. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires that placement decisions consider a child's language and communication needs. For Deaf students, this analysis should include: • Access to a fully accessible language.
• Opportunities for direct communication with peers and staff. 
• Social and emotional well-being.
• Academic achievement and language development.
• The student's ability to participate fully in school life. Residential schools for the Deaf should not be treated as placements of last resort. For many students, they are the most appropriate educational environment and the setting most capable of providing meaningful access to education. As federal responsibilities are transferred, I respectfully request that your agency: 1. Recognize language access as a civil right. 2. Protect the right of Deaf children to acquire and use American Sign Language when appropriate. 3. Ensure that educational programs are evaluated based on actual access and outcomes rather than placement labels. 4. Preserve strong enforcement of communication access requirements. 5. Support a full continuum of placement options, including residential schools for the Deaf. 6. Consider language deprivation and communication isolation as significant educational concerns. 7. Ensure that Deaf students have opportunities for direct communication, not merely mediated communication through interpreters or technology. (Cont.)