“The district court erred by misconstruing the Students’ argument as a right to education generally, despite the record clearly establishing that the Students are alleging a denial of access to in-person education—a specific ‘service, program, or activity’ that CCSD provides to all students,” Circuit Judge Charles R. Wilson wrote. On remand, the district court must analyze under the “correct scope: access to the benefits provided by in-person schooling,” the opinion said.