Special educators frequently teach students with a variety of diagnostic labels, including autism and oppositional defiant disorder. Some of these diagnoses point to the presence of challenging behaviors that might be viewed as threatening and disruptive. Teachers working with these students must make daily choices in how they approach such students. Although at times teachers work with these students to develop self-regulatory behaviors, they often risk working against such students by applying strictly punitive measures. Historically, students with disabilities, particularly those with a diagnosis of an emotional or behavior disorder (EBD), have been overrepresented in school disciplinary reports, juvenile justice facilities, and jails; these trends have become more acute with the emergence of zero tolerance. Currently, a majority of teachers within the United States are obligated to follow zero tolerance policies, replete with mandatory consequences for specific behaviors. Unfortunately, zero tolerance policies often require teachers to follow mandatory policies regarding punishment for certain behaviors. How do teachers manage to honor the unique needs of their students while at the same time adhering to uniform school discipline policies? In this article, the problems with zero tolerance policies are addressed, beginning with a brief history of zero tolerance. Then, five principles are proposed and discussed as being potentially helpful to teachers, administrators, and school personnel who must navigate the tensions between policy and practice with regard to classroom discipline.