Below are Press Releases, News Reports, and community reactions to this mornings announcement of Sonia Sotomayor as President Obama's nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter.
Words from Andy Imparato, President and CEO of AAPD(May 26, 2009):
"...Based on our preliminary analysis of Judge Sotomayor’s extensive record on the bench, we are encouraged that she may be the champion we have been looking for,” said Imparato. “Her jurisprudence in the disability area shows that she has a good understanding of the real-life implications of her decisions, and sees the important connections between disability rights laws and other civil rights laws. Her personal experience as a woman with childhood-onset insulin-dependent diabetes gives her additional insights that can inform her approach to disability issues. We look forward to studying her record in more detail, and working on a bipartisan basis with the Senate to make sure that her approach to disability law is explored as part the confirmation process."
From the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law's Press Release (5/26/09):
Sotomayor Nomination is Good News, Say Advocates for People with Mental Disabilities
...A preliminary review of her cases by Bazelon Center senior staff attorney Lewis Bossing suggests that she would bring that understanding to the Supreme Court. “I am struck by how she has often engaged in searching inquiries into the nature of plaintiffs’ impairments,” Bossing said, “apparently motivated by a genuine desire to accurately determine whether a plaintiff is protected by law.”
Bossing reviewed decisions by Judge Sotomayor involving the ADA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Rehabilitation Act, federal privacy law and Social Security disability rulings. These laws cover the relationships between individuals with disabilities and entities such as employers, schools, state agencies and public facilities..
>>> For a Preliminary Review of Disability Cases of Judge Sonia Sotomayor
President Obama's nomination of Federal Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States affirms that people with diabetes should not be discriminated against and each person with diabetes should be judged based on his or her merits, not on stereotypes or misinformation about diabetes.
"In the days leading up to this nomination, there were several media reports suggesting that Judge Sotomayor should not be considered for this position simply because she has type 1 diabetes," said R. Paul Robertson, MD, President, Medicine & Science, American Diabetes Association. "The advancements in the management of type 1 diabetes have been just amazing over the last two decades and the ability of people to manage their diabetes successfully has been proven. People with diabetes can function and live a long and healthy life."
As this process moves forward, the diabetes community expects that Judge Sotomayor's nomination will be evaluated based on her qualifications and years of experience and not her diabetes. To evaluate her in any other way would be a disservice to the United States.
From a Letter in Support of Judge Sotomayor by Jo Anne Simon, Disability Rights Lawyer from New York (5/4/09):
I write to share my reflections on her qualifications from the position of one who has tried a significant case before her, Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners. Bartlett, a woman with dyslexia, sought admission to the New York State bar. The Board of Law Examiners had repeatedly denied her request for reasonable accommodations—in this case, an extension of time limitations in which to take the exam. Judge Sotomayor found that the Americans with Disabilities Act clearly required the board to provide the requested accommodation.
I have enormous respect and admiration for Judge Sotomayor. She is brilliant, thoughtful and principled. Judge Sotomayor is demanding -- of attorneys, litigants and herself. She was a capable prosecutor and litigator before her appointment to the US District Court...
I knew from the moment we made our first appearance in court, that Judge Sotomayor cared about the person behind the caption. She has carried this through her jurisprudence on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. I have the utmost faith that as member of the Supreme Court, Justice Sotomayor will consider the consequences of Supreme Court decisions on the real lives of the people who will be affected by them. In my humble opinion, we need her on the Court...
>>> For an associated essay by Ms. Simon
Sotomayor's Diabetes: Will It Be a Handicap?
By Alice Park
As President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor approaches the bench with a number of firsts. If she is confirmed to the lifelong post, as is widely expected, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic to sit on the high court, and she would also be the first justice with type 1 diabetes.
The nominee's chronic condition is worth noting, since it puts her at increased risk of several serious medical conditions, including heart disease, kidney problems, blindness and nerve damage — and an increased risk of early death. Studies show that adults with diabetes are two to four times more likely than non-diabetics to die of heart disease. But when treated correctly, say doctors, type 1 diabetes patients are able to lead relatively healthy lives...
30 May 2009
• MYTHS & PRIORITIES FOR THE DISABILITY RIGHTS MOVEMENT
• I have been away from the internet for a few days, tending to an exacerbation of a real disability treated casually by the System, and returned today, only to find an inbox full of hysterical text and headlines that do not match with the stories they purport to describe:
• “ Below you will find articles representing various aspects of the debate around Supreme Court Nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor and her disability, Type I Diabetes.... Sotomayor Faces Job Discrimination for her Disability ; From the Huffington Post (5/14/09) ..... Sotomayor Faces Employment Discrimination for her Disability - From NPR (5/26/09) ... etc.
• To cut to the chase, diabetes is a chronic health problem, not a disability. The only chronic health problem I know of that is defined as a disability on the basis of diagnosis alone, without any additional supporting evidence of limitations on major life functions, is HIV/AIDS.
• It is not helpful for disability advocates and experts to muddy the waters about this matter. The political priority for the disability rights movement in America today is implementation of the Americans With Disabilities Act as amended by the Congress and signed by the president in 2008. The new law is a long step away from astonishing abuses of power by the Supreme Court in the Rehnquist era. Our movement was set back for about a decade. Now it is time to move on.
• We have barely begun to digest this important step forward and do what is needed to ensure that the practices of government, commercial and nonprofit institutions take this change into account in their policies, programs and day to day operations. In New York, socalled disability advocates have done nothing about the new Act, and I am involved in one serious effort to remedy that failure by applying the new law to the health care system. It requires banging some important heads against the wall, and it is working, slowly, but better than nothing at all.
• But overly zealous misinterpretation of the law and assertions that chronic diseases are by definition disabling do not help at all. What is at issue runs far deeper in American culture than the obtuse prejudices of a Rehnquist. Custom and politics have created a distortion of disability matters at least as serious as the Rehnquist court’s decisions, if not more so.
• Custom and politics, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, have defined disability for too long. This tradition tends to limit application of the laws to politically correct disability, favoring the 13 percent of disabled Americans with mobility impairments, and ignoring the needs of the other 87 percent.
• The 2008 amendment marks another attempt to correct this bias (PUBLIC LAW 110–325—SEPT. 25, 2008 122 STAT. 3553 sec. 4
at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ325.110):
SEC. 4. DISABILITY DEFINED .....
(a) Definition of Disability.--Section 3 of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102) is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF DISABILITY.
‘‘As used in this Act:
‘‘(1) DISABILITY.—The term ‘disability’ means, with respect
to an individual—
‘‘(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment .....
‘‘(2) MAJOR LIFE ACTIVITIES.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.
‘‘(B) MAJOR BODILY FUNCTIONS.—For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to,
functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.”
This language, lifted from the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, successfully translates the vague idea of disability into reality, into practical definitions that can be used to campaign for major institutional accommodations to the 20 percent of all Americans -- about 60 million people -- with genuine disabilities.
• What we often face in those institutions is the bland assertion that “we treat everyone the same. We don’t discriminate.” Sorry, folks, that’s just not good enough.
• Hopefully, we will now have a new series of federal court decisions straightening out the ignorant, and the conservative hardheads who have disrupted and delayed the process of accommodation that began in 1990 and was stalled by the Rehnquist court starting in 1999.
• Hopefully, the Supreme Court, with Justice Sotomayor in the majority, will correct this tragic detour in disability law.
• Hopefully, those who do not know any better will discover that wheelchair ramps and curb cuts have nothing to do with the accommodations needed by the 87 percent of Americans with disabilities who do not have mobility impairments.
• For example, people in treatment for cancer needs lots of nutritious snacks throughout the day. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center understands this. (Visit the waiting areas in their clinics.) Not many others do.
• People with lung disease need ventilation, air-conditioning, water to offset dehydration, and minimum waiting times because of extreme fatigue that greatly limits time for activities outside the home.
• Each health problem causing a disability requires a specific set of accommodations of its own. The job ahead is to define them and get them into the heads of the people who run things.
• Read the 2008 law. It is must reading for anyone who wants to play a constructive role in this important area of American life. It is a strong repudiation of the Rehnquist court’s conservative bias and a source of tremendous hope.
The heart of the matter was stated clearly by the Congress in 1973 (at
US Code TITLE 29 > CHAPTER 16 > GENERAL > § 701 § 701. Findings; purpose; policy):
“ Congress finds that .....
“ (3) disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to— (A) live independently; (B) enjoy self-determination; (C) make choices; (D) contribute to society; (E) pursue meaningful careers; and (F) enjoy full inclusion and integration in the economic, political, social, cultural, and educational mainstream of American society .....”
Translating that simple and powerful idea into reality, and not muddying the waters, is our work now and will be for generations to come. Equipped with this simple and powerful idea, we cannot fail. Hold to it as if your life depended on it, because it does.
Arthur Springer
Lay Advocate for People With Disabilities
as99@verizon.net
Posted by: Arthur Springer | May 30, 2009 at 11:28 PM