-----Original Message-----
From: Memphis Center for Independent Living [mailto:mcil(AT)mem.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 11:15 AM
To: adapt(AT)austin.com
Subject: From the Commercial Appeal
JUNE 15, 15:35 EDT
Court Protects Disabled Prisoners
By LAURIE ASSEO
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — State prison inmates are protected by a
federal ban on discrimination against the disabled, the Supreme
Court ruled Monday, rebuffing officials in 34 states who said the law
has led to unreasonable demands by prisoners.
The Americans With Disabilities Act clearly covers state prisons
and prisoners, said the justices' unanimous ruling, which lets a
former Pennsylvania inmate sue over his exclusion from a boot camp
program that could have shortened his sentence.
``I expect a lot of creative litigation on the part of prisoners,''
said
Kent Scheidegger of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which
supported Pennsylvania officials' appeal. ``We're now opening
another floodgate.''
Former inmate Ronald Yeskey's lawyer, Donald Specter, said the
ruling means ``prison officials cannot discriminate against prisoners
with disabilities and must make reasonable modifications to prison
operations so that these prisoners will have reasonable access to
most prison programs.''
The ADA, enacted by Congress in 1990, has led to many aids for the
disabled such as wheelchair ramps in public places. It bars
discrimination against the disabled by public entities including
state
or local government agencies.
Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said, ``The statute's
language unmistakably includes state prisons and prisoners within
its coverage.''
In other decisions Monday, the court:
—Dealt a severe blow to a multistate program that provides about
$100 million a year for legal help for the poor. The justices ruled
5-4
that interest earned from short-term accounts lawyers hold for their
clients are the private property of those clients.
—Ruled 6-3 in a New York case that people can be found guilty of
``willfully'' selling guns without a license even if there is no
proof
they knew about the licensing requirement.
—Decided that phone companies whose rates are federally
regulated cannot be sued under state laws governing business
contracts. The 8-1 ruling threw out a $1 million damage award AT&T
had been ordered to pay to an Oregon company.
—Said a 1996 federal law that limits prison inmate appeals still
allows
the justices to review some lower court decisions that deny inmates
the right to challenge the constitutionality of their convictions.
The
5-4 ruling came in a Nebraska case.
The ruling in the disabled inmate case upholds a federal appeals
court decision that let Yeskey sue Pennsylvania prison authorities
over their refusal to enroll him in a boot camp program.
The law says public agencies can be required to make reasonable
modifications to accommodate the needs of disabled people who
otherwise qualify for a program or service. Agencies do not have to
take action that poses a significant risk to health or safety.
Pennsylvania authorities had argued that applying the law to state
prisons would unlawfully limit states' right to manage their prisons.
Attorneys general from 33 states supported Pennsylvania's appeal,
saying in a friend-of-the-court brief that the ADA has led to inmate
demands ``of all sorts, many of them exceedingly unreasonable.''
Marjorie Rifkin of the American Civil Liberties Union's National
Prison Project said the law requires only reasonable adjustments.
``There has not in fact been a flood of lawsuits'' by inmates, she
said.
Yeskey was serving 18 to 36 months for drunken driving, escape and
resisting arrest. Prison officials cited Yeskey's high blood pressure
in refusing to send him to a boot camp where he could have earned a
reduction in his sentence to six months.
He sued in 1994, seeking admission to the program and financial
damages.
A federal judge threw out his lawsuit. But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals gave Yeskey a new chance to argue that he should have
been allowed to participate in the boot camp with at most a
reasonable change in the program to accommodate his high blood
pressure.
Yeskey has since completed his sentence, but he still seeks a
damage award.
Scalia's opinion said the justices did not decide Pennsylvania
authorities' argument that applying the disabilities law to state
prisons overstepped Congress' authority to regulate interstate
commerce. He said the question was not addressed by lower courts.
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]