Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Adults AMC] Disability issues in the Presidential campaign

Expand Messages
  • Brendan Flynn
    I think the president is the one with the handicap, albeit a mental one. JRTowner@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 1/23/2004 11:01:14 AM Central Standard
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 23, 2004
      I think the president is the one with the handicap, albeit a mental one.

      JRTowner@... wrote: In a message dated 1/23/2004 11:01:14 AM Central Standard Time,
      bifocalbonnie@... writes:
      Please don't take my message so seriously--I was just playing!! And just for
      the record-I know it was G.W.'s FATHER George Herbert Walker Bush-who signed
      the ADA on July 26, 1990-afterall, I did vote for him.

      And as far as your comment, "What has Georgie Boy done for us since?" --he
      retired.
      Georgie Boy is still in office appointing federal judges that will take ADA
      further down a dark road and leave us there. I'm planning to vote for the
      person that will bring ADA back into the light.

      The New York Times' Adam Cohen wrote that "Anyone looking for evidence that a
      mean mood has descended on the nation need only stop by the Supreme Court for
      the arguments in Tennessee v. Lane.

      A ruling in the case is expected in several months. While Justice Scalia is
      expected to side with the State of Tennessee on ideological grounds, few
      expected the level of callousness he exhibited during the oral arguments.

      The Chicago Sun Times reported that, "On Tuesday, only Justice Antonin Scalia
      seemed hostile to the disabled defendants' position. Lack of access for the
      disabled "is bad, but is it a constitutional violation?" he asked.

      The LA Times reported that during Tuesday's argument, Scalia said he saw no
      constitutional reason why state agencies cannot discriminate against persons he
      referred to as "handicaps."

      Some states "may not have made it easy for handicaps to vote," he said, but
      that is not reason enough for Congress to subject states to lawsuits, he said.

      "An inaccessible voting place proves nothing at all," the New York Times
      reported Justice Scalia said. "It just shows that the state didn't go out of its
      way" to provide help.

      "You don't concede that the Constitution is violated by not providing
      educational facilities to all handicapped children?" he asks. All you need is a
      "rational basis" for keeping them out, Scalia points out. "It's enough that the
      cost would be excessive. So saying that so many handicapped students can't get
      into schools means nothing at all." [Quotes from Slate]

      Slate columnist Dahlia Lithwick (who described the oral arguments as a
      "Morning of Meanness") observes: "If it were easy and free to help disadvantaged
      minorities, we wouldn't have needed civil rights legislation in the first place."

      The Legal Times reported that Scalia posited a hypothetical of a state-owned
      hockey rink and wondered with sarcasm whether lack of access to such a
      facility would violate a fundamental right.

      Scalia also suggested that while it may be "less dignified" for a person in a
      wheelchair to be carried up the stairs by constables to a second-floor
      courtroom, states should not be subject to suit simply because they do not provide
      elevators. (If the people carrying the wheelchair bound person dropped the
      person and the person was injured or chair was damaged would the person be able to
      recover the medical or repair cost from the state? The state is will be
      exempt from lawsuit if Lane loses he case before the Supreme Court.)

      Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist agreed.

      Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen
      G. Breyer have consistently upheld Congress' power to enforce
      antidiscrimination laws.

      Justice Clarence Thomas is likely to side with Rehnquist and Scalia. So the
      outcome will depend on Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy.
      Both have sided with the states in past cases, but also have supported civil
      rights claims in other contexts.

      Knight Ridder Newspapers reported that "advocates for people with
      disabilities worried that the justices' previous rulings - as well as their own ADA
      practices - don't bode well for their cause."

      "Marca Bristo, a former chair of the National Council on Disabilities who
      uses a wheelchair, remembers being told to wheel herself off to the side of the
      nation's highest court during a 2001 hearing. John Stanton, a deaf lawyer who
      doesn't know sign language, was told that his real-time transcription device
      wasn't allowed in the austere, marble-lined courtroom. Jeff Rosen, legal counsel
      at the American Council on Disabilities, was hassled by court marshals, who
      said his sign-language interpreter might distract the justices."

      "They have a segregationist attitude in their courtroom," said Rosen, who
      chose not to attend Tuesday's hearing because he said he didn't want to confront
      the situation again. "Together with their opinions, which have continuously
      narrowed the ADA since it was passed, I think it shows that they really don't
      understand these issues."



      Denise
      JRT's Rule


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      ---------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amc_adults/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      amc_adults-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.





      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • resommer@aol.com
      Never say never. rick In a message dated 1/23/04 11:01:09 AM Central Standard Time, bifocalbonnie@yahoo.com writes: I am not a political person-and this is the
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 24, 2004
        Never say never.

        rick

        In a message dated 1/23/04 11:01:09 AM Central Standard Time,
        bifocalbonnie@... writes:
        I am not a political person-and this is the last time
        you will hear from me on any political topic.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • tearsfromastar1
        ... Dear Everyone, I heard about the Tennessee vs. Lane case and it has tremendous implications for the field I used to work in, Special Education. I cannot
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 27, 2004
          --- In amc_adults@yahoogroups.com,
          Dear Everyone,
          I heard about the Tennessee vs. Lane case and it has tremendous
          implications for the field I used to work in, Special Education. I
          cannot believe that the State of Tennessee would think it was right
          to make a person climb up steps on their hands and knees because they
          don't want to spend money on putting in a ramp leading to an
          elevator. If they can defy this law, municipalities will do things
          on the cheap to the detriment of my husband and others with similar
          needs. This will affect how children are accomodated as well
          Brendan Flynn <soapeatingmonkey@y...> wrote:
          > I think the president is the one with the handicap, albeit a mental
          one.
          >
          > JRTowner@a... wrote:In a message dated 1/23/2004 11:01:14 AM
          Central Standard Time,
          > bifocalbonnie@y... writes:
          > Please don't take my message so seriously--I was just playing!!
          And just for
          > the record-I know it was G.W.'s FATHER George Herbert Walker Bush-
          who signed
          > the ADA on July 26, 1990-afterall, I did vote for him.
          >
          > And as far as your comment, "What has Georgie Boy done for us
          since?" --he
          > retired.
          > Georgie Boy is still in office appointing federal judges that will
          take ADA
          > further down a dark road and leave us there. I'm planning to vote
          for the
          > person that will bring ADA back into the light.
          >
          > The New York Times' Adam Cohen wrote that "Anyone looking for
          evidence that a
          > mean mood has descended on the nation need only stop by the Supreme
          Court for
          > the arguments in Tennessee v. Lane.
          >
          > A ruling in the case is expected in several months. While Justice
          Scalia is
          > expected to side with the State of Tennessee on ideological
          grounds, few
          > expected the level of callousness he exhibited during the oral
          arguments.
          >
          > The Chicago Sun Times reported that, "On Tuesday, only Justice
          Antonin Scalia
          > seemed hostile to the disabled defendants' position. Lack of access
          for the
          > disabled "is bad, but is it a constitutional violation?" he asked.
          >
          > The LA Times reported that during Tuesday's argument, Scalia said
          he saw no
          > constitutional reason why state agencies cannot discriminate
          against persons he
          > referred to as "handicaps."
          >
          > Some states "may not have made it easy for handicaps to vote," he
          said, but
          > that is not reason enough for Congress to subject states to
          lawsuits, he said.
          >
          > "An inaccessible voting place proves nothing at all," the New York
          Times
          > reported Justice Scalia said. "It just shows that the state didn't
          go out of its
          > way" to provide help.
          >
          > "You don't concede that the Constitution is violated by not
          providing
          > educational facilities to all handicapped children?" he asks. All
          you need is a
          > "rational basis" for keeping them out, Scalia points out. "It's
          enough that the
          > cost would be excessive. So saying that so many handicapped
          students can't get
          > into schools means nothing at all." [Quotes from Slate]
          >
          > Slate columnist Dahlia Lithwick (who described the oral arguments
          as a
          > "Morning of Meanness") observes: "If it were easy and free to help
          disadvantaged
          > minorities, we wouldn't have needed civil rights legislation in the
          first place."
          >
          > The Legal Times reported that Scalia posited a hypothetical of a
          state-owned
          > hockey rink and wondered with sarcasm whether lack of access to
          such a
          > facility would violate a fundamental right.
          >
          > Scalia also suggested that while it may be "less dignified" for a
          person in a
          > wheelchair to be carried up the stairs by constables to a second-
          floor
          > courtroom, states should not be subject to suit simply because they
          do not provide
          > elevators. (If the people carrying the wheelchair bound person
          dropped the
          > person and the person was injured or chair was damaged would the
          person be able to
          > recover the medical or repair cost from the state? The state is
          will be
          > exempt from lawsuit if Lane loses he case before the Supreme
          Court.)
          >
          > Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist agreed.
          >
          > Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
          and Stephen
          > G. Breyer have consistently upheld Congress' power to enforce
          > antidiscrimination laws.
          >
          > Justice Clarence Thomas is likely to side with Rehnquist and
          Scalia. So the
          > outcome will depend on Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M.
          Kennedy.
          > Both have sided with the states in past cases, but also have
          supported civil
          > rights claims in other contexts.
          >
          > Knight Ridder Newspapers reported that "advocates for people with
          > disabilities worried that the justices' previous rulings - as well
          as their own ADA
          > practices - don't bode well for their cause."
          >
          > "Marca Bristo, a former chair of the National Council on
          Disabilities who
          > uses a wheelchair, remembers being told to wheel herself off to the
          side of the
          > nation's highest court during a 2001 hearing. John Stanton, a deaf
          lawyer who
          > doesn't know sign language, was told that his real-time
          transcription device
          > wasn't allowed in the austere, marble-lined courtroom. Jeff Rosen,
          legal counsel
          > at the American Council on Disabilities, was hassled by court
          marshals, who
          > said his sign-language interpreter might distract the justices."
          >
          > "They have a segregationist attitude in their courtroom," said
          Rosen, who
          > chose not to attend Tuesday's hearing because he said he didn't
          want to confront
          > the situation again. "Together with their opinions, which have
          continuously
          > narrowed the ADA since it was passed, I think it shows that they
          really don't
          > understand these issues."
          >
          >
          >
          > Denise
          > JRT's Rule
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          > To visit your group on the web, go to:
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amc_adults/
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > amc_adults-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          Service.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > Do you Yahoo!?
          > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.