Big thanks to our amici!

The Department of Justice and a terrific collection of disability rights organizations filed amicus briefs before the Tenth Circuit in our Hollister case.   A big thanks to Mark Gross and Sasha Samberg-Champion at the DOJ and to Michelle Uzeta, who drafted the brief on behalf of the disability rights amici:   Legal Center for People with Disabilities And Older People, American Association of People with Disabilities, Center for Rights of Parents with Disabilities, Disability Rights Advocates, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Disability Rights Legal Center, Legal Aid Society – Employment Law Center, National Disability Rights Network, and National Federation of the Blind. We deeply appreciate the support and enjoyed reading the excellent briefs! 2014-02-10 Legal Center etc Amicus Brief2014-02-10 DOJ...

CREEC and co-counsel file respose brief in Hollister appeal

We filed our response brief to the 10th Circuit in the Hollister case yesterday.     As our many blogfans know, CREEC and the Colorado Cross Disability Coalition are challenging the Raised Porch Entrances at Hollister clothing stores as violations of Title III of the ADA: Shoppers who use wheelchairs have no access to the porch or the entrances from it to the store; instead, they have to go around to the side to accessible entrances decorated to look like shuttered windows. We prevailed before the district court and Hollister appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.   The appeal is a real law-nerd smörgÃ¥sbord*:   Hollister challenged standing, class certification, the merits (why the porches violate the ADA), and the injunction to fix the porches.   Our response brief addresses all of these arguments.   From the statement of the case:         The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) is a “broad mandate” to eliminate discrimination against people with disabilities, and to “integrate them “˜into the economic and social mainstream of American life.'”   PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661, 675-76 (2001) (citations omitted).   Congress found that “historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities.”   42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(2).   Thus, “[i]ntegration is fundamental to the purposes of the ADA.   Provision of segregated accommodations and services relegate persons with disabilities to second-class citizen status.”   H. Rep. 101-485(III), 101st Cong., 2d Sess, at 56, reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 445, 479 (“House Rep. pt. 3″).   The goal of the ADA is to “”˜eradicat[e] the “invisibility of the...
Support CREEC