Search

The article focuses on the implications of the Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller decision for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It mentions emotional distress damages under disability discrimination laws like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Topics include the historical and legal context of these statutes, the Court's reasoning in Cummings and the potential impact on future disability discrimination.

The article highlights the impact of socioeconomic disparities and other forms of inequalities on the accessibility level of the legal system to all persons with specific focus to persons with disabilities. It further reports unequal access to the legal system violates the equal protection of the law and infringes the ability of individuals and groups to exercise their fundamental rights.

The article examines the U.S. policies concerning individuals with disabilities that has often wrestled with the choice between universalism and targeting. Topics discussed include integration of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); intellectual disabilities that were not entitled to any special protection for purposes of equal protection analysis; and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case "Brown v. Board of Education for individuals with disabilities"on the issue.

The article highlights the impact of socioeconomic disparities and other forms of inequalities on the accessibility level of the legal system to all persons with specific focus to persons with disabilities. Topics discussed include intersection between age and disability discrimination; relationship between aging and disability; remedy employment discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions that narrowly interpret the ADA.

The article highlights the impact of socioeconomic disparities and other forms of inequalities on the accessibility level of the legal system to all persons with specific focus to persons with disabilities. Topics discussed include intersection between age and disability discrimination; relationship between aging and disability; remedy employment discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions that narrowly interpret the ADA.

The article highlights the needless barrier to academic performance that is increasingly common at the university level banning the use of laptops in the U.S. It argues that permissive laptop policy should be on the list of Universal Design features; and ways in which a child is disabled under the definition set forth by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

The article examines the intersection between age and disability discrimination in the context of work. Topics discussed include relationship between aging and disability; remedy employment discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA); the U.S. Supreme Court decisions that narrowly interpret the ADEA; and use of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to remedy discrimination.

The article focuses on standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments Act for protecting people with disabilities. Topics discussed include need for the interpretation and construction of the ADA Amendment act, importance of the act for the Americans with disabilities and need of evidences for proofing the disabilities. It further discusses the medical and social requirements for amending the act.

The article focuses on the reasonable accommodation of the mixed motive claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Topics discussed include discriminatory intent, aim of the ADA in the elimination of employment discrimination and judicial opinions related to the U.S. Supreme Court case Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. It further discusses the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

Two conflicting stories have consumed the academic debate regard-ing the impact of deinstitutionalization litigation. The first, which has risen almost to the level of conventional wisdom, is that deinstitutionali-zation was a disaster. The second story challenges the suggestion that deinstitutionalization has uniformly been unsuccessful, as well as the causal link critics seek to draw with the growth of the homeless popula-tion. This Article, which embraces the second story, assesses the current wave of deinstitutionalization litigation. It contends that things will be different this time. The particular outcomes of the first wave of deinstitu-tionalization litigation, this Article contends, resulted from the interaction between the political dynamics surrounding that litigation and the legal claims asserted by deinstitutionalization advocates. But both those dynamics and those legal claims have changed significantly. Precisely because the first wave of deinstitutionalization litigation was so successful in moving residents out of large state institutions, the efforts of deinstitutionalization advocates have turned to ensuring the availability of adequate services in the community. This has shifted the fiscal politics of the field in ways that destabilize old political alliances but create the potential for new ones. At the same time, deinstitutionalization advocates have moved from the due process theories on which they relied in the 1970s and 1980s to an anti-discrimination theory relying on the ADA. That theory imposes a powerful incentive on states to create and fund adequate community services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]