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