Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Scholars' Reply To Professor Fried, Yale Kamisar, Lee C. Bollinger, Judith C. Areen, Barbara A. Black
Scholars' Reply To Professor Fried, Yale Kamisar, Lee C. Bollinger, Judith C. Areen, Barbara A. Black
Articles
As Solicitor General of the United States, Charles Fried, like any good advocate, was often in the position of attempting to generate broad holdings from relatively narrow and particularistic Supreme Court decisions. This was especially true in affirmative action cases. There, the Department of Justice argued that cautious precedents actually stood for the broad proposition that measures designed to put members of disadvantaged groups on a plane of equality should, for constitutional purposes, be treated the same as measures intended to stigmatize or subordinate them. The Supreme Court, however, has consistently rejected this reading of its precedents and the broad …
Aids, Astrology, And Arline: Towards A Causal Interpretation Of Section 504, Gary S. Lawson
Aids, Astrology, And Arline: Towards A Causal Interpretation Of Section 504, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides that ‘[n]o otherwise qualified individual with handicaps shall, solely by reason of his handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under [any federal or federally funded program].’1 In School Board v. Arline,2 the Supreme Court held that a school teacher with a history of infectious tuberculosis was an ‘individual with handicaps' protected by section 504,3 and that the determination of whether she was ‘otherwise qualified’ to teach elementary school required a sound medical assessment of the risks …