Having problems with message search?
Dear Kate and hello all:
Very much looking forward to discussing this case and its outcome with you. I myself in the same time period did not achieve certiorari but that was not directly an ADA case - rather a defamation of persons with disabilities matter. And had to be written and pleased to have done so. I
I Understand there may be some interesting statements on actual and virtual jurisdiction issues in the present Opinions of Tennessee v. Lane - I refer in present context not to geographical reach and who can be brought to a forum, but who can validly make decisions about and for persons with disabilities. They can of course touch on the edges.
The case law on disabilities is indeed full of separately brought issues which, however, converge as they concern Rights and Respect for Dignity. In these fora, it will be interesting to discuss further the latter as well as the former.
Very best wishes, :) LDMF.
Individual Email.
For Reference Only:
Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D.
President, The National Disability Party http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/disabilityparty,
Member Disability Caucus to the UN Disability Treaty,
Recording Secretary & Member of the Board of Directors, Communications Coordination Committee for the UN.
http:///www.cccun.org, Internet Presence (Design, Use) 1960s -
For Reference Only:
Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D.
President, The National Disability Party http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/disabilityparty,
Member Disability Caucus to the UN Disability Treaty,
Recording Secretary & Member of the Board of Directors, Communications Coordination Committee for the UN.
http:///www.cccun.org, Internet Presence (Design, Use) 1960s -
To all Receivers - Continuing Invitation/Galleries:
http://www.yahoogroups/group/PICTURE-IT-AT-THE-UN
http://www.yahoogroups/group/PICTURE-IT-AT-THE-UN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Seelman, Katherine" <kds31+@...>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: [DisabilityConvention] Supreme court ruling re disabled and suing state
>
> Katherine D. Seelman, Ph.D.
> Associate Dean for Disability Programs
> Professor of Rehabilitation Science and Technology
> 5036 Forbes Tower
> Pittsburgh, PA 15260
> Phone: 412-383-6727
> Fax: 412-383-6597
> E-mail: kds31@...
> http://www.shrs.pitt.edu
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: leejcaroll@... [mailto:leejcaroll@...]
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 7:00 PM
> To: invisible-NO-MORE@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: Chronic_Pain_and_LAW@yahoogroups.com;
> DisabilityConvention@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [DisabilityConvention] Supreme court ruling re disabled and
> suing state
>
>
> High Court Upholds Rule Under Disability Law
> Citizens Can Sue States for Failing to Follow ADA
> By ANNE GEARAN, AP
>
> WASHINGTON (May 17) - The Supreme Court upheld the rights of disabled
> people
> under a national law meant to protect them, ruling Monday that a
> paraplegic
> who crawled up the steps of a small-town courthouse can sue over the
> lack of an
> elevator.
>
>
> The 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act properly gives private citizens
> such
> as George Lane the right to seek money in court if a state fails to live
> up
> to the law's requirements, a 5-to-4 majority ruled.
> In previous cases, the high court has repeatedly limited the effect of
> the
> ADA, so Monday's outcome was unexpected.
> At issue in Lane's case was the right of private citizens to try to
> pursue
> alleged violations of the ADA in federal courts. Advocates for the
> disabled
> claimed that the fear of hefty damage awards was a powerful tool to
> force state
> governments to follow the law.
> "The unequal treatment of disabled persons in the administration of
> judicial
> services has a long history" that has persisted despite
> anti-discrimination
> laws, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for himself and Justices Sandra
> Day
> O'Connor, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
>
> More on the Supreme Court
>
>
> * Supreme Court Web Site
> * Search for Opinions
>
>
> * AOL Search: Court News
>
>
> The case began when Lane tried to sue the state of Tennessee for up to
> $100,000 for what he claimed was humiliating treatment that violated the
> ADA. Lane crawled up the Polk County courthouse steps once for an
> appearance in a
> reckless driving case, but was arrested in 1996 for failing to appear in
> court
> when he refused to crawl a second time. Courthouse employees have said
> he
> also refused offers of help.
> Tennessee did not dispute that the courthouse lacked an elevator, or
> that the
> state has a duty to make its services available to all. The state
> argued,
> however, that Lane's constitutional rights were not violated and that he
> had no
> right to take the state to court.
> The state claimed that Congress went too far in writing the ADA, because
> the
> Constitution says a state government cannot be sued in federal court
> without
> its consent.
> Stevens said Congress had ample evidence of discrimination when it wrote
> the
> part of the law at issue in Lane's case. Called Title II, it guarantees
> that
> the disabled will have access to government services.
> "Congress enacted Title II against a backdrop of pervasive unequal
> treatment
> in the administration of state services and programs, including
> systematic
> deprivations of fundamental rights," Stevens wrote.
> The majority appeared to limit its ruling to the fairly narrow sphere of
>
> courthouses and court services, but the rationale could be used to allow
> private
> suits on other grounds.
> The case is the latest in a series of conflicts over states' rights and
> the
> powers of Congress, but it did not come out like most of the others. In
> a series of cases since the late 1990s, O'Connor has sided with the
> court's core conservatives to form a five-member majority that has
> gradually
> expanded the sovereign rights of state governments while limiting
> federal control and
> congressional power.
> Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, chief architect of that states
> rights
> push, dissented in Monday's case. Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M.
> Kennedy and
> Clarence Thomas also dissented.
> "Congress utterly failed to identify any evidence that disabled persons
> were
> denied constitutionally protected access to judicial proceedings,"
> Rehnquist
> wrote.
> Scalia said the ruling will open the door to more lawsuits and allows
> judges
> to act like legislators.
> "It is past time to draw a line limiting the uncontrolled spread of a
> well-intentioned textual distortion," Scalia wrote.
> The ADA guarantees against discrimination on the job, and requires that
> public buildings and public services be open to the disabled. The law is
> probably
> best known for prompting installation of wheelchair ramps and other
> accommodations in many buildings.
> In a similar case three years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that states
> cannot
> be sued by their own employees for failing to comply with the ADA's
> guarantee
> against discrimination in the workplace.
> While Congress can override the states' usual sovereign immunity in
> certain
> extraordinary circumstances, it did not show that step was necessary in
> the
> case of a nurse demoted after breast cancer treatment, the high court
> said then. Tennessee had argued that the same reasoning applied to
> Lane's case. Advocates for the disabled maintain that without the
> opportunity to collect
> money, disabled people who may also be poor have little incentive to
> bear the
> costs of bringing a court challenge.
> If Monday's ruling had gone the other way, Lane could have gone to court
> only
> to ask the state to fix the problem.
> "We're shocked," former Rep. Tony Coehlo, an author of the ADA, said
> after
> the ruling. "Shocked and pleased." Coehlo, who is disabled by epilepsy,
> said
> Tennessee and several states that backed it now want to take away
> important
> rights.
> These "states continue to not understand that those of us with
> disabilities
> have these rights granted to us by the court, and they continue to
> fight," the
> ADA long after its passage, Coehlo said.
> The case is Tennessee v. Lane, 02-1667.
> On the Net:
> Supreme Court site: http:www.supremecourtus.gov
> 05/17/04 12:43 EDT
> Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP
> news
> report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
> distributed
> without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active
> hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/iGurlB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DisabilityConvention/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DisabilityConvention-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Offline 
Send Email