Transcript Disability Advocacy in the Courts Sherrie Brown Dennis Lang LSJ 332/CHID 332
Disability Advocacy in the Courts
Sherrie Brown Dennis Lang LSJ 332/CHID 332 Session 10 Fall 2006 1
Role of the Courts…
Courts will only hear a case or controversy that is brought forward.
Courts are limited to the facts before it.
Courts’ role is to decide questions of fact, review legislative or executive actions, or determine constitutional questions.
Enforcement of the decision is a separate issue from ruling on the merits of the case.
2
Wyatt v. Stickney
(Alabama 1972)
Mentally retarded persons involuntarily confined to state institution had a constitutional right to habilitation. Humane psychological and physical environment Individualized habilitation and training plan Qualified professional and paraprofessional staff in sufficient numbers to deliver training Extensive protections ordered to ensure that individuals were afforded basic needs —e.g., adequate food, LRE, transition, minimal physical standards, etc.
Court also appointed a “Human Rights Committee” consisting of 7 members, including resident with mental retardation.
3
NY State Association for Retarded Children v. Carey
(
consent decree 1975) People with mental retardation have a constitutional right to protection from harm.
Willowbrook School forbidden from implementing seclusion, corporal punishment, degradation, medical experimentation and routine use of restraints.
Decree mandates individual plans for education, therapy, care and development of each child.
Established a Consumer Advisory Committee of parents, community leaders, residents (current and former) to monitor.
4
Mills v. Board of Education of D.C.
(D.D.C. 1972) 7 disabled children sued the DC public schools for violating their statutory and constitutional rights to education. DC admits that it has failed in it’s “affirmative duty” to supply plaintiffs with public education and agreed in 1971 to do so, but did not.
Court ruled that the school district violated children’s constitutional and statutory rights under federal and DC law and order the school (under consent decree) to implement extensive changes.
Violations based on two findings: Schools did not follow their own rules and procedures Denial of Constitutional rights to Equal Protection and Due Process DC agreed under court order to implement extensive due process protections – these became the basis for the EAHCA in 1975.
5
Case Analysis
Is a skill and like any other…takes time to develop.
Don’t get discouraged by the legalese, cases are really just stories about people just like you and me. Try the framework I am giving you today.
Work together and have fun.
Hint: it is always a good idea to read the opinion.
6
Briefing a case
FACTS
ISSUE
HOLDING
REASONING/RATIONALE
SIGNIFICANCE
7
FACTS:
Who did what to whom and why are they in court?
Olmstead
facts: Two women “voluntarily” entered a state hospital for individuals with cognitive impairments (mental retardation and/or mental illness) to receive treatment.
They were declared “fit” to return to community, were not allowed to leave because the state declared there were no appropriate supports available for them in the community.
They sued the state arguing that Title II of the ADA prohibits a public entity from discriminating against qualified persons with disabilities.
The term "discrimination" includes the failure of a public entity to administer its programs in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities. Further, a public entity must make reasonable modifications to it policies and practices unless such measures would fundamentally alter the nature of the public entity's program.
8
ISSUE:
What question is the plaintiff asking the court to address?
Olmstead
: Does the nondiscrimination mandate (under Title II) require placement of persons with disabilities in community settings rather than in institutions in certain circumstances, in order to achieve the "integration" requirement?
9
HOLDING:
How does the court answer the question or issue? Can be a yes/no answer.
Olmstead
: Qualified YES. Unnecessary institutionalization violates civil rights of people with disabilities States are required to make reasonable modifications in order to serve people in the community when: The individual desires to live in a community setting; The state’s treatment professionals determine community placement is appropriate; and The placement can be reasonably accommodated, considering the resources available to the state and the needs of others receiving services from the state.
10
REASONING/RATIONALE:
How does the court reach its holding in the case —i.e, why does the court answer the question the way it does?
Olmstead
: Shows deference to Department of Justice regulations: 1) unjustified placement or retention of persons in institutions constitutes discrimination “by reason of disability” under Title II and 2) reasonable modifications to programs/services required.
Looks to purpose behind ADA passage and statutory language.
Modifies the Court of Appeals construction of “reasonable modification” regulation to provide State some defense to obligation to immediately find placements in the community. States have obligation to administer services “with an even hand” and may consider the resources available and the range of services required for others in State. 11
Cases Selected
PGA Tour v. Martin
(Title III)
Toyota v. Williams (Title I) McGregor v. Louisiana State University (Section 504) Southeastern Community College v. Davis (Section 504) Johnson v. Gambrinus Company
(Title III) 12
Americans with Disabilities Act
Title I —Employment (employers with more than 15 employees) Title II —Public Services (state and local government) Title III —Public Accommodations (private entities open to the public —e.g., restaurants, theatres, schools, health care providers) Title IV —Telecommunications Title V —Miscellaneous 13
Basic provisions of ADA
Thou shall not discriminate against qualified people with disabilities.
Thou shall provide 1) reasonable accommodation or modification as necessary in order to allow the person to participate/benefit; 2) auxiliary aids and services; and 3) physical access.
Defenses to these duties: undue hardship; fundamental alteration to programs or services; or direct threat.
14
So, go forth and brief…
Five groups of 7-8 each are assigned a different case.
Read the case and try to identify the facts, issue, holding, reasoning as you read. Take about 20 minutes.
Debate/discussion for about 20 minutes.
Assign someone to be the spokesperson for your group; you will present your brief BRIEFLY to the class.
15
Justice for disabled people?
Are there any claims from justice to extend public provision for families to lighten the extra demands of raising a child with cognitive deficits so severe that no education or habilitation will turn that child into a future taxpayer? (Kittay at 65) And is there any ground for the accusation that the US —the wealthiest nation in the history of the world —is unjust for not providing appropriate resources to families who lack means to properly care for their developmentally disabled child? (Kittay at 64) 16