| MCIL Journal | FreeOurPeople.org | ADAPT Action Report | Home |
| |
| M C I L Journal |
| MCIL Journal 2007 |
| MCIL Journal 2006 |
| MCIL Journal Index |
Index
of previous MCIL Journals
1/29/00, 10:11 pmc
Justice for All
Washington, DC USA
Colleagues Our crowning achievement of the 20th century the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, ADA is under massive attack and our civil rights are threatened.
The Supreme Court has taken two cases challenging the constitutionality of Title II of the ADA. Simply stated, the nine Supreme Court Justices will decide this summer if Congress had the authority to pass this part of the ADA or should our civil rights be a State's prerogative.
This is unconscionable and we should all be outraged at this frontal attack on our civil and human rights.
We must do more than be outraged - WE MUST ACT! We must Renew the Pledge to the ADA! I implore you to advocate with others in your State to send the message: Don't Tread On the ADA!
Please meet with your Congressional delegation, your Governor and your Attorney General and have them Renew the Pledge to the ADA. Challenge them to show their support for the ADA. This is not a time for complacency. This is a time for action. If we don't show our power and our commitment to the ADA it will be continuously attacked and weakened.
It would be the irony of ironies if during the tenth anniversary of the ADA our rights were ripped away by the Supreme Court.
This is a battle we must win. Together we will win. There will be Justice for All. America for All.
Thank you!
Justin Dart, Jr.
Justice for All
Washington, DC
USA
(Email to Justice for All is to be posted care of Fred Fay at: jfa@mailbot.com.)
To view the entire article, go to http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/fedpage/supremecourt/19992000/A14217-2000Jan22.html
The Supreme Court said yesterday it would decide whether state workers are covered by a watershed federal law that protects people with disabilities from discrimination. The case, likely to have wide ramifications for the nation's handicapped, raises the stakes in a court term that already is one of the most significant in years.
The specific dispute concerns whether states, like private employers, can be sued under a section of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) intended to prevent bias on the job. But an eventual ruling also could determine whether states can be sued under the ADA for excluding the disabled from services or limiting their access to public facilities.
As such, the case-brought by a Florida prison guard who says he was denied a promotion partly because of a heart condition-could produce one of the most important rulings to date on the law passed a decade ago to open doors and economic opportunities for disabled persons. Like the abortion and gay rights cases recently taken up by the justices, the disabilities dispute will be argued in April; a ruling is expected by late June, when the court usually recesses.
The case could offer the Rehnquist majority another opportunity in its drive to pare down the power of Congress and boost state autonomy. A five-justice majority has repeatedly struck down federal laws that allow individuals to sue when they believe states have violated their rights. The court has held Congress to a high standard in determining whether lawmakers validly lifted states' usual 11th Amendment immunity from being sued in federal court.
Just 11 days ago, the majority ruled that state workers who were discriminated against because of their age could not sue their employers under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act. That decision in Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents arose from a trio of cases, including one brought by the Florida prison guard in yesterday's case. Wellington Dickson said he lost out on the promotion because of his age and because the department refused to accommodate his heart condition.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which looked at the scope of both the age discrimination and disability rights law, ruled against Dickson on the age question and for him on the disabilities issue. In its 1998 decision, the 11th Circuit said Congress properly used its power to enforce civil rights by specifically determining in the ADA that "individuals with disabilities are a discrete and insular minority . . . faced with restrictions [and] subjected to a history of purposeful unequal treatment."
Yesterday the high court accepted the agency's appeal of that ruling in Florida Department of Corrections v. Dickson.
Separately, the justices said they will hear a constitutional challenge to a California primary election law that allows voting across party lines. Proposition 198, approved by voters in 1996, permits an individual to cast a ballot selecting, for example, a Democrat for governor, a Republican for attorney general, a Libertarian for U.S. senator. Only three other states-Alaska, Louisiana and Washington-have such open primaries.
The state's Democratic Party, Republican Party, the Libertarian Party, and the Peace and Freedom Party joined in a lawsuit, claiming Proposition 198 violated their First Amendment rights of free association. They contend it allows outsiders to determine a party's ideology and compromises party members' freedom to join together to advance common political beliefs. (Before the initiative was adopted, only voters of a particular party could vote in that party's primary to nominate candidates for the general election.)
Defending the new primary law, state officials note that it was approved by nearly 60 percent of the vote and contend it properly gives voters more choices on the ballot. Lower courts ruled for the state, saying that the burden on the parties' First Amendment rights was minimal and asserting that it enhanced the democratic nature of elections.
In their appeal, the four political parties emphasize the importance of party unity and say the "blanket primary" particularly hurts minor parties trying to communicate an ideology and build a slate of nominees. The case is California Democratic Party v. Jones.
© 2000 The Washington Post Company
The Memphis Center for Independent Living
1633 Madison Avenue,
Memphis, TN 38104
(901) 726-6404 v/tty (901) 726-6521 fax
mcil@mcil.org
MCIL is a United Way of the Mid-South member Agency
Return to the top of this page
MCIL would like feedback on the accessibility of this website. Please send your comments and concerns to webmaster@mcil.org