This Essay presents a study of leading U.S. lawyers who represent families in disputes involving the special education of children with disabilities. The research consists of structured interviews of selected attorneys from around the country, and tests whether the conclusions about disability cause lawyers drawn by Waterstone, Stein, and Wilkins (in Disability Cause Lawyers, their pathbreaking study of thirteen leading attorneys involved in disability rights work) hold true for special education cause lawyers. Following the approach in Disability Cause Lawyers, this study considers attorney backgrounds, practice structure and financing, connections to social movement organizations, and modes of advocacy. The study concludes that lawyers who engage in the cause of educational rights of children with disabilities, like other disability cause lawyers, face challenges of litigation financing, wary courts, and a splintered social movement. Nonetheless, they manage to avoid practices that some studies of cause lawyers have criticized: being entranced with paper victories in court, and engaging too much with legal elites and not enough with the social movement. In this way, they also resemble the attorneys in the Disability Cause Lawyers study. The scholarly debate on cause lawyering is extensive and contentious. This Essay makes a unique contribution to that literature as the first study of the work of lawyers who view educational rights for children with disabilities as a social cause and who see themselves as contributing to the movement for educational rights for individuals with disabilities.