Ehlena was born with cerebral palsy, a neurological condition that severely limited her mobility.

Ehlena was born with cerebral palsy, a neurological condition that severely limited her mobility. Wonder, a goldendoodle dog, was trained to help her balance, retrieve dropped items, open and close doors, turn on lights, take off her coat and other tasks. In 2009, 13 year old Ehlena's elementary school in Napoleon, Michigan refused to allow her to attend school with Wonder. The school said she already had a one-on-one human aide, as part of her individualized special education program. The family eventually moved to a different school district where Wonder was welcomed. They filed suit in 2012 in federal court, claiming discrimination under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, which permits service dogs in public institutions. In February 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ehlena.   Assume that Joshua, an 11 year old with autism, is prohibited from bringing his service dog, Champ, to school. If Joshua (through his parents) file suit in state court against the school, what should the state court rule?

In accordance with the doctrine of stare decisis, the lower court is bound to follow the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and allow Champ to accompany Joshua to school.

In accordance with federalism, the state court is not bound by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and may decide on its own whether to allow Champ to accompany Joshua to school.

In accordance with sovereign immunity, the lower court is bound to follow the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and allow Champ to accompany Joshua to school.

In accordance with states rights, the lower court should rule in the best interests of the state (in favor of the school) and prohibit Champ from accompanying Joshua to schoo