Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Disability Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Disability Law

Educational Equality For Children With Disabilities: The 2016 Term Cases, Samuel R. Bagenstos Nov 2017

Educational Equality For Children With Disabilities: The 2016 Term Cases, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Book Chapters

One of the most longstanding debates in educational policy pits the goal of equality against the goal of adequacy: Should we aim to guarantee that all children receive an equal education? Or simply that they all receive an adequate education? The debate is vexing in part because there are many ways to specify “equality” and “adequacy.” Are we talking about equality of inputs (which inputs?), equality of opportunity (to achieve what?), or equality of results (which results?)? Douglas Rae and his colleagues famously argued that there are no fewer than 108 structurally distinct conceptions of equality. And how do we ...


How The Ada Regulates And Restricts Solitary Confinement For People With Mental Disabilities, Margo Schlanger May 2016

How The Ada Regulates And Restricts Solitary Confinement For People With Mental Disabilities, Margo Schlanger

Other Publications

In a landmark decision two decades ago, United States District Judge Thelton Henderson emphasized the toxic effects of solitary confinement for inmates with mental illness. In Madrid v. Gomez, a case about California’s Pelican Bay prison, Judge Henderson wrote that isolated conditions in the Special Housing Unit, or SHU, while not amounting to cruel and unusual punishment for all prisoners, were unconstitutional for those “at a particularly high risk for suffering very serious or severe injury to their mental health . . . .” Vulnerable prisoners included those with pre-existing mental illness, intellectual disabilities, and brain damage. Henderson concluded that “[f]or these ...


Safe, But Not Sound: Limiting Safe Harbor Immunity For Health And Disability Insurers And Self-Insured Employers Under The Americans With Disabilities Act, Rachel Schneller Ziegler Dec 2002

Safe, But Not Sound: Limiting Safe Harbor Immunity For Health And Disability Insurers And Self-Insured Employers Under The Americans With Disabilities Act, Rachel Schneller Ziegler

Michigan Law Review

When Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") on July 26, 1990, supporters heralded the Act as a full-scale victory for the 43 million disabled Americans. The Act's protections went far beyond those of its predecessor, the Rehabilitation Act of 1974, which only prohibited discrimination against individuals with disabilities by entities receiving federal funding. The new act was intended to prevent discrimination by private and public employers, public services, and public accommodations. In a bill signing ceremony at the White House, in front of more than two thousand advocates for the disabled, then President George Bush likened the ...


The Imperial Sovereign: Sovereign Immunity & The Ada, Judith Olans Brown, Wendy E. Parmet Dec 2001

The Imperial Sovereign: Sovereign Immunity & The Ada, Judith Olans Brown, Wendy E. Parmet

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Professors Brown and Parmet examine the impact of the Supreme Court's resurrection of state sovereign immunity on the rights of individuals protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act in light of the recent decision, Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett. Placing Garrett within the context of the Rehnquist Court's evolving reallocation of state and federal authority, they argue that the Court has relied upon a mythic and dangerous notion of sovereignty that is foreign to the Framers' understanding. Brown and Parmet go on to show that, by determining that federalism compels constraining congressional power ...


Constitutional Doctrine As Paring Tool: The Struggle For "Relevant" Evidence In University Of Alabama V. Garrett, Pamela Brandwein Dec 2001

Constitutional Doctrine As Paring Tool: The Struggle For "Relevant" Evidence In University Of Alabama V. Garrett, Pamela Brandwein

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article examines the difficulties involved in translating the social model of disability into the idiom of constitutional law. The immediate focus is University of Alabama v. Garrett. Both parts of this Article consider how disability rights claims collide with a discourse of legitimacy in constitutional law. Part I focuses on the arguments presented in several major Briefs filed in support of Garrett. Constitutional doctrines are conceived as paring tools and it is shown how the Court used these doctrines to easily pare down the body of evidence Garrett's lawyers sought to claim as relevant in justifying the ADA ...


Reducing The Overburden: The Doris Coal Presumption And Administrative Efficiency Under The Black Lung Benefits Act, Eric R. Olson Dec 2000

Reducing The Overburden: The Doris Coal Presumption And Administrative Efficiency Under The Black Lung Benefits Act, Eric R. Olson

Michigan Law Review

Coal dust build-up prevents many coal miners' lungs from functioning properly. This condition, commonly referred to as black lung or pneumoconiosis, can make common activities nearly impossible. The Black Lung Benefits Act covers the cost of medical treatment for many affected miners, though procedural impediments often prevent miners from receiving care. The miner's current or former employer, when identifiable, must pay for medical care relating to the miner's black lung. Most disputes over miners' claims for medical care arise when the miner has a history of cigarette smoking and the need for medical care could arise from either ...


Winning The Battle, Losing The War?: Judicial Scrutiny Of Prisoners' Statutory Claims Under The Americans With Disabilities Act, Christopher J. Burke Nov 1999

Winning The Battle, Losing The War?: Judicial Scrutiny Of Prisoners' Statutory Claims Under The Americans With Disabilities Act, Christopher J. Burke

Michigan Law Review

When he was convicted in 1994 of drunken driving, escape, and resisting arrest, Ronald Yeskey was sentenced to serve 18 to 36 months in a Pennsylvania prison. In addition, the judge recommended that Yeskey be sent to a motivational boot camp operated by the state. Upon successful completion of the boot camp program, Yeskey's sentence would then be reduced to six months. Although he eagerly wanted to participate, the prison refused him entrance into the boot camp program because of his history of hypertension, and also denied him admission into an alternative program for the disabled. As a result ...