THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO
EQUALITY
COMES BEFORE
THE STATES' RIGHT TO
DISCRIMINATE!
Copyright
© 2001 The National Disabled Students Union. All Rights Reserved.
Contents of this Packet
A. Cover sheet
B. A sample local press release
C. Step-by-step "Media
Guide"
1.
Make your contact list by looking at what media outlets you want to try to
get
coverage in and identifying reporters, editors, and producers who might
be
receptive.
2.
Modify the sample press release to fit your needs or write your own.
3.
Prepare to "sell" the story by having a one-sentence explanation of
what
the
story is, and then preparing yourself for the questions you're likely to
get
asked.
4.
"Pitch" the story in three steps: CALL, FAX, CALL.
5.
Remember to stay "on message": The people's right to equality comes
before
the state's right to discriminate!
D. Background information for
people talking to reporters
FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE For
more information contact:
April
16, 2001 Sarah
Triano 773-463-4776
Name
Number
CIVIL
RIGHTS BEFORE STATES’ RIGHTS, SAY DISABLED STUDENTS
At
noon on Tuesday, April 17, UIC students will meet at 1640 W. Roosevelt to join
with disabled students across the nation in a simultaneous Leave-Out to protest
the Supreme Court’s pattern of weakening civil rights protections in the name
of “states’ rights.”
“The
people’s right to equality comes before the states’ right to discriminate,”
says Sarah Triano. Triano, a member of
UIC’s Disabled Students Union, is a co-founder of the National Disabled
Students Union and one of the organizers responsible for Tuesday’s national
demonstration. The NDSU was founded on
February 21, 2001, in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trustees of the University of Alabama v.
Garrett et. al. that state employees facing disability discrimination at
work cannot sue for damages.
The
Garrett ruling will make it harder
for today’s students with disabilities to become tomorrows workers. The Census Bureau reports that 50% of
disabled people in America are unemployed, and those who do have jobs make less
money than the nondisabled.
Title
I of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires employers to give job-seekers
and employees with disabilities the same chances nondisabled workers get, but
the Garrett decision makes it easier for state governments to get away with
breaking that law. Workers with
disabilities will be unable to recover damages, making it more difficult for
them to finance lawsuits challenging clear discrimination.
The ADA isn’t the first civil rights law to be
weakened by the Court. In 2000, Court
rulings struck down the civil rights remedy of the Violence Against Women Act
and protected states against suits by their employees under the federal Age
Discrimination in Employment Act.
Students
across the country are leaving out of their classrooms and libraries at 1:00 pm
Eastern to protest under the banner of the National Disabled Students
Union. UIC students and community
supporters will meet at noon, Chicago time, outside 1640 W. Roosevelt for a
march and rally.
The
Disabled Students Union is an active campus group fighting for equal access for
disabled students. The National
Disabled Students Union is a national, cross-disability, student organization
concerned with disability rights. “In less
than two months, we’ve gone from being an idea in a few students’ minds to
having members on more than sixty campuses,” Triano says. “We’re building momentum.”
###
Media Guide
1. Making your contact list:
We
are attempting to obtain media on two fronts:
*
Media that will reach potential allies to alert them to what's going on
and what they can do
*
Media that will reach policymakers to alert them to what we want them to
do
Potential
allies are likely to be paying attention to campus newspapers, newspapers aimed
at minority groups concerned with civil rights, TV and radio shows aimed at
minority groups concerned with civil rights, etc. When we deal with these
outlets, we want to stress that the Supreme Court has put the states' right to
discriminate ahead of the peoples' right to equality, and that we are
organizing against that. Some groups, especially those that are small and/or
just getting off the ground, may want to focus on educating and recruiting
potential allies in their media work.
Both
potential allies and policymakers are likely to be paying attention to local
newspapers, local TV news (especially just before and after prime time), local
radio news, etc. When we deal with these outlets, we want to stress that the
Supreme Court has put the states' right to discriminate ahead of the peoples'
right to equality, and that state legislators can and must now make things
right. Groups that are larger and/or more organized will probably focus on both
educating/recruiting allies and pressuring policymakers.
THE
FIRST STEP
in working on media is to identify the outlets you want to reach (if you are a
campus group, any campus media - such as the college newspaper - need to be
included) and, if possible, particular reporters who might be receptive to
covering our story.
*
Have particular outlets or reporters covered disability issues from a civil
rights perspective?
*
Have particular outlets or reporters seemed interested in how Supreme Court
decisions or other national events affect people in your area?
*
Are there particular reporters someone in your group has a relationship with?
THE
SECOND STEP in working on media is to identify how and when you want to make the
initial contact.
* You
need a telephone number (voice, TTY, or voice and relay, as appropriate) for
the outlet
* A
daily newspaper, TV show, or radio show should probably be approached on Monday
morning (the day before the rally).
* A
newspaper, TV show, or radio show that comes out less frequently should
probably be approached shortly after the last issue or show before April 17
comes out.
>From
these two steps, you should have a list put together of who (and when) you want
to call.
2.
Putting your press release together.
When
you have decided how you are going to celebrate the Leave-Out in your area,
you'll be ready to prepare a press release giving details to reporters. In this
packet is a sample press release. You can modify it to fit your group's needs,
or you can write your own. Here are instructions for modifying your sample
release:
*
The press release should go on letterhead that identifies your group. If you
want, you can get a copy of the NDSU logo and identify yourself as a local
chapter of NDSU.
*
If your group isn't a student group, you'll need to change the headline so that
it fits.
*
Make sure the date is the actual date you are sending the release out.
*
For press releases sent to big city dailies, add two local contacts – name and
number - above Sarah Triano's name. For press releases sent to local outlets,
remove Sarah's name and just use two local contacts.
*
Change all references to Chicago and UIC to appropriate local references. Make
sure that the time - in Chicago, it's noon - is correct, depending on your time
zone. For everyone participating in the synchronized Leave-Out, that's 1pm
Eastern, noon Central, 11am Mountain, and 10am Pacific.
*
The second paragraph should be changed to highlight an important local leader
or organizer. (Remember to explain why this person is important.) You can keep
the quote and attribute it to that local leader or change it, but the basic
message should be the same: “The people's right to equality comes before the
states' right to discriminate.”
*
The final paragraph should be changed to highlight an important local leader or
organizer. This can be the same one as in Paragraph 2, or a different one. (If
it's a different person, remember to explain why this person is important.) You
can keep the quote or change it to something your group thinks is important.
*
Local reporters are likely to be more interested in local stories. Patricia
Garrett's case is important - but are there any local people who have faced discrimination
by state employers? If you're at a state college or university, are there
disabled faculty or staff with important stories about civil rights? Are there
students who want to work for the state after graduation?
*
If you live in a state where there is any significant move to reinstate the
protections we've lost at the state level, please praise the people involved.
*
Make any other changes your group thinks are important. The final product
should be no longer than one page, with 12-point font.
Once
you have your press release, you have your primary tool for media work. Anyone
you plan to send reporters to should have a copy.
3.
Preparing to "sell the story":
Reporters
have to choose between a lot of different stories, trying to find some that the
people who watch or read or listen to them will be interested in. It's our job
to convince people that our story is worth covering (that the audience will be
interested), that our information is reliable (that they won't have to do a lot
of extra research), and that we are going to be comfortable to work with (that
reporters will get what they need from us). We have to "sell" them on
our story, and on us.
Your
first and best tool is your press release. The first paragraph of the release
should tell the story - who is doing what, when and where, and how and why -
very very briefly. (Your press release should be ready to go before you start
pitching.) Remember, we're doing this because the peoples' right to equality
comes before the states' right to discriminate.
You
should be prepared to answer any obvious questions. For example, in the sample
press release in this kit, we've included some information about (1) the
Garrett case, (2) census data concerning people with disabilities, and (3)
other decisions in which the Court has weakened civil rights protections. A
reporter might well ask you about these things. (There is information in this
media toolkit.)
You
might also get asked how many people you expect to have at the demonstration.
(If you aren't sure, go for a low estimate. If you say you're going to have 50
people and 25 will show up, reporters are going to notice how small that number
is. If you say you're going to have 10 - 15 and 25 show up, that's going to look
big.) You might get asked how many other campuses are involved. We will work to
keep you updated. You might get asked what precisely is going to happen at the
demonstration. (If you're trying for radio coverage, people will want to know
what will happen that might be interesting to listen to. If you're trying for
TV coverage, people will want to know what will happen that might be
interesting to watch.) You might get asked for the phone numbers of other
people the reporter can talk to. You should either have the information
available, or be able to say, "I will find out and call you right
back."
You
are likely to get asked "Who is NDSU and what are your goals?" You
might get asked, "What's all this about the braid?" Refer to your
NDSU Leave-Out Activism Packet for that information.
Many
people find it useful to role-play pitching beforehand, practicing talking to
"reporters" who are busy, or uninformed on the issue, or want a lot
of information.
By
the time you're ready to pitch, you should feel comfortable that you can
"sell" the story.
4.
Pitching:
You're going to follow a three-step plan:
1. Call
the reporter to "pitch" the story.
2. Fax
the press release and any other information the reporter wants.
3. Call
the reporter to make sure the fax went through.
THE
FIRST STEP
is a fast attempt to catch the reporter's attention:
*
When you get the reporter on the phone, give your name and the group (or
coalition) you're representing. "Hi, I'm Sarah Triano, and I'm calling
from the UIC Disability Students Union and the National Disabled Students
Union." Then ask if the reporter has time for you to pitch a story.
*
If the reporter asks you to call back later, follow up.
*
Your initial pitch should be very fast. Since the first paragraph of your press
release should have all the relevant information (who is doing what, when and
where, and how and why, all very quickly), you can use the release as a guide.
"At noon tomorrow, disabled students and community members and other
people who are concerned about the Supreme Court's weakening of civil rights
protection will be demonstrating at 1640 West Roosevelt. We say that the
people's right to equality comes before the states' right to discriminate."
*
If the reporter asks for more information, you should either give it
immediately, or say, "I will find out and call you right back."
*
Ask whether you can fax the reporter a press release (and write down any
instructions given).
When
you get off the phone, write down any notes you have on that interaction.
THE
SECOND STEP is to fax the information the reporter needs to him or her:
*
Follow any directions you've been given precisely.
*
Use a cover sheet and the one-page press release, plus anything else you've
been asked for. Feel free to make a reference to your conversation. "I'm
following up on our telephone conversation and faxing you our press release. If
you have any questions or need any more information, you can reach me at
...."
*
Follow up quickly, before the reporter has time to forget the phone call.
THE
THIRD STEP
is to follow up. Wait a little while, and then call to ensure that the fax went
through:
*
"This is Sarah Triano from the National Disabled Students Union again. I just
wanted to make sure you got our press release about the demonstration tomorrow
at noon."
*
If the reporter has any more questions after reading the fax, you can answer
them then. Otherwise, this should be a quick call.
Keep
notes on all the press contacts you have, and share them among the people whose
phone numbers have been given out and those who will be working on talking to
reporters at the demonstration.
At
this point, you should be ready to respond to any attempts by the media to
contact you, and getting ready for the demonstration itself.
5.
At and after the demonstration:
We
need to stay "on message." Reporters have all kinds of ideas about
disability, and they may have all kinds of ideas about how the story should be
told. All the activists who are working with the press should be working to get
them to understand the same one-sentence message:
THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO EQUALITY COMES BEFORE THE
STATES' RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE.
Everyone
should know what the message is, and think of a couple of different ways to
communicate it. We don't all have to use the same words; we do all want to be
conveying the same idea.
When
the demonstration is over and the reporters have left, it's a good idea to have
a "debriefing" with your activists, to share experiences with the
media, to get an idea of who you hope will cover you, and to discuss any
problems that anyone had. The more you learn from this demonstration, the more
prepared you will be for any future demonstrations you want to participate in.
NDSU
and other people participating in the Leave-Out would love to hear how the
media work went for you. We'd love to see copies of any news stories you manage
to get, and to hear about your work.
E-mail
Cal Montgomery
ckmont@aol.com
Or
write Sarah Triano
National
Disabled Students Union
3948
Waveland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60618
Accessible Society E-Letter 3/20/2001: NEW FIGURES FROM CENSUS BUREAU
CAN RESHAPE IMAGE OF DISABILITY
On
Friday (March 16), the Census Bureau released new figures on the numbers of individuals
in the U.S. who say they have disabilities. A story from the Associated Press's
Genaro C. Armas is so far the only media attention the new figures have
garnered.
Armas
led his story with this: "Half the adult Americans with disabilities have
jobs, and the employed typically earn less than the average American, new
Census Bureau estimates show. The disparity is worse among those people whose
disabilities are considered 'severe.'"
The
data, from the Census Bureau's 1997 Survey of Income and Program Participation
(SIPP), revealed that 52.6 million people (19.7 percent of the population) had
some level of disability. The report, "Americans with Disabilities:
1997," is available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disable/sipp/disable97.html
The
newsworthy fact -- that half of those reporting disability have jobs -- is
actually an artifact of the definition used in the survey. For decades,
advocates worked to get the Census Bureau to use functional definitions of
disability rather than work definitions -- and we are now reaping the result:
people who have jobs but who also have functional limitations are being defined
as "disabled." Years ago, anyone who was working were considered
"not disabled."
"The
Survey of Income and Program Participation contains questions about the ability
to perform a number of activities," says report author Jack McNeill of the
Census Bureau. "If an individual reported having difficulty performing a
specific activity, a follow-up question usually determined if the level of
difficulty was severe or not."
The
SIPP is a household survey, so the data exclude people in institutions.
Approximately 32,000 households were interviewed to obtain the data.
Survey
results show that:
*
In 1997, 52.6 million people (19.7 percent of the population) had some level of
disability and 33.0 million (12.3 percent of the population) had a severe
disability.
*
About 10.1 million individuals (3.8 percent of the population) needed personal
assistance with one or more "activities of daily living" or
"instrumental activities of daily living."
*
Among the population 15 years old and over, 2.2 million used a wheelchair.
Another 6.4 million used some other ambulatory aid such as a cane, crutches, or
a walker.
*
About 7.7 million individuals 15 years old and over had difficulty seeing the
words and letters in ordinary newspaper print; of them, 1.8 million were unable
to see.
*
The poverty rate among the population 25 to 64 years old with no disability was
8.3 percent; it was 27.9 percent for those with a severe disability.
The
figures of those who have difficulty seeing ordinary newsprint -- 7.7 million
says the Census Bureau -- are similar to those reported earlier this month by
the Centers for Disease Control. An article about that finding -- from the same
SIPP data this Census Bureau report used -- is online at the Center's website
at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5007a3.htm
****************
The
Center for An Accessible Society is funded by the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research to focus public attention on disability and
independent living issues. The Center is a project of Exploding Myths, Inc. a
media enterprise company.
Garrett v. University of
Alabama
The Supreme Court's Decision
on the Constitutionality of the ADA
Barry C. Taylor, Equip for
Equality Legal Advocacy Director
A. State Immunity under the
11th Amendment
The
Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") prohibits discrimination
against people with disabilities in employment (Title I), state and local
governments programs (Title II) and public accommodations (Title III). Although the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution permits Congress to pass laws to prevent discriminatory actions by
states, the 11th Amendment has been interpreted to provide states with immunity
from private lawsuits in federal court unless the federal legislation remedies
or prevents a problem of unconstitutional state action, and the legislation is
deemed proportional and a reasonable response to the problem it is intended to
remedy or prevent. In recent years,
the Supreme Court has interpreted the states' immunity under the 11th Amendment
quite broadly.
B. The Facts of the Garrett
Case
The
Garrett case is the consolidation of two ADA employment discrimination cases by
state employees against two separate state defendants. In one, state university employee Patricia
Garrett alleged that her employer violated the ADA by demoting and then firing
her from her position as a supervising nurse after she was treated for breast
cancer. In the other case, Milton Ash
alleged that the Alabama Department of Human Services violated the ADA by
failing to reasonably accommodate his asthma by not enforcing the agency's
no-smoking rule. Both sought money
damages in their ADA lawsuits. In both
cases, the State of Alabama argued that it is immune from suit because Congress
exceeded its authority by applying the ADA to state entities.
C. The Supreme Court's
Decision
In
a narrow 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that suits in federal court by
state employees to recover money damages under Title I of the ADA are barred by
the 11th Amendment. The majority held
that although Congress clearly stated its intention for states to be subject to
ADA employment discrimination suits, the ADA's legislative record fails to show
that Congress identified a history and pattern of irrational employment
discrimination by the states against people with disabilities. The Court stated that the legislative
history indicated that Congress targeted the ADA at employment discrimination
in the private sector.
D. Implications of the
Supreme Court's Ruling in Garrett
· State employers are no longer subject to
private federal ADA Title I employment discrimination suits seeking money
damages. The result of the Supreme
Court's decision is that employees with disabilities who work for state
employers have fewer civil rights protections than employees with disabilities
who work for private or local governmental employers.
· States are still subject to ADA Title I
employment discrimination suits seeking non-monetary relief. The Supreme Court expressly held that state
employees can bring ADA actions in federal court when seeking injunctive
relief, such as reasonable accommodations, promotions or reinstatement.
· States are still subject to Title I
employment discrimination suits in federal court for money damages brought by
the United States. The Department of
Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission can still bring ADA
actions for money damages against the states.
· Private and local governmental employers
are still subject to Title I employment discrimination suits in federal
court. The Supreme Court did not extend
the 11th Amendment immunity beyond state entities.
· States are still subject to ADA claims
under Title II. The Supreme Court
expressly declined to address the constitutionality of Title II of the ADA,
which covers programs and services provided by state and local governmental
entities. However, the Seventh Circuit
Court of Appeals, which covers Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, has ruled that
states cannot be sued for money damages under Title II. Even though the Supreme Court did not
address this issue, individuals in those three states cannot bring a Title II
claim for damages against the state.
· States are still subject to the Supreme
Court's ruling in Olmstead. The Garrett
decision does not affect the Supreme Court's previous decision in Olmstead that
unjustified institutionalization is
discrimination under the ADA. States
must still comply with the Olmstead
decision.
· States are still subject to federal
disability lawsuits under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. In Garrett, plaintiffs only sued under the
ADA. Although the Supreme Court did not
address the Rehab Act, the Seventh Circuit has held that, unlike the ADA,
private individuals can bring suits in federal court against states under the
Rehab Act, as it is legislation under Congress' spending power.
· People with disabilities can still bring
private suits in state court against state entities under state law and the
ADA. See, Erickson v. Board of
Governors, 207 F.3d 945 (7th Cir. 2000).
Questions? Call Equip for Equality at (800) 537-2632
(v) or (800) 610-2779 (tty)
From an ACLU
press release dated June 28, 2000:
"A majority of the Court was appointed
by presidents who claimed to be looking for judges who would enforce law, not
make law," said Shapiro. "Yet, this Court has shown a greater
willingness to strike down Acts of Congress than any Court since the early days
of the New Deal."
This helps to explain, for example, the
Court's surprisingly lopsided vote earlier this week to uphold Miranda in United States v. Dickerson. Although Chief Justice Rehnquist had
frequently criticized Miranda in past decisions, he wrote a forceful opinion
for the majority in Dickerson
reaffirming the principle that it is the Court, not Congress, that is
ultimately responsible for interpreting the Fifth Amendment.
On the other hand, the Court continued to
breathe new life into the doctrine of state's rights by invalidating two
important pieces of civil rights legislation enacted by Congress during the
past decade. In United States v. Morrison,
the Court held that Congress had exceeded its powers under both the Commerce
Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment by allowing the victims of sexually
motivated violence to sue their attackers in federal court. And, in Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, the
Court held that the Eleventh Amendment protected the states against suits by
their employees under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Media Contact: Sharon Reis 202/745-5103
May 18, 2000
Supreme Court Ruling on Violence Against Women Act
Disappoints Women’s Organization
Ruling
negatively impacts campus women and all victims of violent crime
Washington,
DC, May 15, 2000 - - The American Association of University Women (AAUW) Legal
Advocacy Fund is extremely disappointed with the Supreme Court’s narrow
decision declaring the civil rights remedy of the Violence Against Women Act
(VAWA) unconstitutional. The justices ruled 5-4 that Christy Brzonkala, a
former Virginia Tech student who was allegedly raped by two football players,
cannot sue her attackers for monetary damages in a federal court. The AAUW
Legal Advocacy Fund has provided financial and moral support for Brzonkala
since February 1997.
The
justices dismissed the complaint, citing that Congress had exceeded its
constitutional bounds. The majority opinion stated that Congress may not regulate
non-economic, violent criminal conduct based solely on the conduct’s aggregate
effect on interstate commerce. The AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund and other
proponents of VAWA believe that violent crime impacts the economy to a degree
that Congress should have the power to regulate it under the Commerce Clause.
The
ruling means that women like Christy Brzonkala must rely on state criminal and
civil laws to protect them, and not the federal government. In fact, 36 state
attorneys general asked the Supreme Court to uphold the federal remedy in VAWA
because states are not adequately addressing the issue.
"Unfortunately,
we know too well that the current state-level remedies for rape, assault, and
abuse are not working. How can we encourage women to speak out for justice,
when justice varies so differently from state to state?" said Patricia
McCabe, an attorney and the director of the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund.
Sylvia
Newman, president of the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund said, "We were hopeful
that Sandra Day O’Connor, who often supports women’s issues, would be on our
side for this decision. We are very disappointed. The next step is to mobilize
women to the polls this fall knowing that the next president could appoint one
to three Supreme Court justices. Only by speaking loudly and clearly through
the voting process will we be able to remedy this injustice."
# # #
The
AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund (LAF) provides funding and a support system for women
seeking judicial redress for sex discrimination in higher education. Since
1981, LAF has helped students, faculty and administrators challenge
discriminatory practices involving harassment, denial of tenure or promotion
and aid for women’s athletics programs. LAF has provided more than $600,000 in
financial support -- plus thousands in technical assistance -- for more than 58
lawsuits. AAUW is the nation’s leading advocate for education and equity for
women and girls.
NATIONAL
DISABLED STUDENTS UNION