[Nfbkabs] FW: [coca] FW: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop JudgeGene Pratter
Mike Freeman
k7uij at panix.com
Wed Jan 23 10:06:24 CST 2008
I shouldn't think NFB would want to get involved with campaigns such as
that below, or at least IMO we ought to check with Jim McCarthy before
acting.
Just my opinion.
Mike Freeman, President
NFB of Washington
----- Original Message -----
From: Shannon Caldwell
To: nfbk at yahoogroups.com ; nfbkl at yahoogroups.com ; nfbkabs at nfbnet.org
; hklein at uky.edu ; kjone at email.uky.edu ; awilson at uky.edu ;
j.glisson at insightbb.com ; pglisson at independenceplaceky.org ;
ksbalum at yahoogroups.com ; kadb at yahoogroups.com ; janisk.friend at ky.gov ;
sarahf.richardson at ky.gov ; dfb-src at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:43 PM
Subject: [Nfbkabs] FW: [coca] FW: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop
JudgeGene Pratter
FYI
Please share and act accordingly.
Shannon Caldwell
sjgc at mis.net
_____
I've stopped 2,924 spam and fraud messages. You can too!
Free trial of spam and fraud protection at www.cloudmark.com
<http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7>
<http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7> Cloudmark Desktop - Join the
fight
against spam!
-----Original Message-----
From: coca-bounces at aucd.org [mailto:coca-bounces at aucd.org] On Behalf
Of
Gordon Richins
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 3:56 PM
To: coca at aucd.org; pnpolicy at iglou.com
Subject: [coca] FW: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop Judge Gene
Pratter
_____
From: ADA Watch [mailto:JimWard at ADAwatch.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 1:42 PM
To: gordon at cpd2.usu.edu
Subject: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop Judge Gene Pratter
Action Alert: Campaign for Fair Judges
ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR)
Take Action:
Contact Senate Judiciary Committee Members
Message:
1. "Oppose Judge Gene Pratter to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals."
2. "Don't Consider Controversial Judicial Nominees During Presidential
Election Year."
Rationale:
The confirmation of extremist judicial nominees to has led to the
further
weakening of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and other civil
rights protections. We believe that none of the pending controversial
judicial nominations, including Judge Gene Pratter to the Third
Circuit
Court of Appeals, should be acted upon.
The Senate should follow its longstanding policy that judicial
nominations
are not processed in a presidential election year unless they are
uncontroversial. Federal courts have inappropriately rolled back many
important rights of people with disabilities, and the nomination of
controversial nominees who are hostile to civil rights must come to an
end.
Accordingly, the nominations of Judge Pratter and all other
controversial
nominees should not be acted upon.
Contact Information:
Please voice your concerns to Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Chairman
Senator Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member Senator Arlen Specter, and all
committee members. Contact information can be found at:
http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm
<http://m1e.net/c?50512722-WbiMY4JeyHdZE%403053134-ivJlSUPNZAfuM>
Background Information:
DISABILITY RIGHTS GROUPS OPPOSE THE
NOMINATION OF GENE PRATTER
ADA Watch, National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR), National
Council
for Independent Living (NCIL), Liberty Resources and the Bazelon
Center for
Mental Health Law oppose the nomination of Gene E.K. Pratter to the
Third
Circuit Court of Appeals. We are deeply troubled by certain rulings
by
Judge Pratter that demonstrate a dismissive attitude toward the rights
of
people with disabilities. In light of Judge Pratter's controversial
record,
her nomination should not be acted upon in an election year.
Judge Pratter, a member of the Federalist Society, has been a federal
judge
in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania since she was confirmed in
2004,
after being nominated by President George W. Bush. During her several
years
on the bench, Judge Pratter has authored decisions that are of grave
concern
to disability rights advocates.
In Phillips v. Sheraton Society Hill,[1][1] Judge Pratter dismissed an
ADA
employment discrimination case brought by a man with a back injury.
Judge
Pratter failed to apply the federal courts' customary solicitude for
the
rights of litigants who are not represented by counsel, and dismissed
the
case on her own motion because the man's complaint did not indicate
whether
he had exhausted his administrative remedies (that is, whether he had
first
given the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission a chance to
investigate
his claim). Judge Pratter dismissed the case without permitting
Phillips,
who was unrepresented, to amend his complaint to demonstrate that he
had
filed a complaint with the EEOC and received a "right to sue" letter.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that dismissal
was
inappropriate: "We are troubled by the fact that Phillips was given
no
opportunity to amend the Complaint before the District Court sua
sponte
dismissed it. Phillips' failure as a pro se litigant to allege
exhaustion
does not warrant dismissal of this action with prejudice..We cannot
assume
from [his] pro se complaint that no right-to-sue letter exists or that
he
failed to exhaust his administrative remedies merely because he failed
to
attach a right-to-sue letter." The appeals court also noted that
Phillips
had filed a form complaint that did not require him to affirmatively
state
that he had exhausted administrative remedies. Judge Pratter's harsh
ruling
suggests an indifference to the financial realities faced by many
people
with disabilities, who may not be able to afford representation in
order to
challenge disability discrimination, but who may not be familiar with
the
procedural requirements of federal court litigation.
In Disabled in Action v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation
Authority,[2][2] Judge Pratter dismissed a disability rights group's
claims
seeking to require the Philadelphia area transit authority to comply
with
the ADA by making two major subway stations accessible to people with
disabilities. These stations were required to be accessible because
they
had undergone substantial renovations. Judge Pratter held that the
plaintiff's ADA claims were barred because they were filed too late.
She
held that the statute of limitations began running from the time that
the
plaintiff and its lawyer knew that the transit authority did not plan
to
make the stations accessible, rather than from the time that the
renovations
were completed without making the stations accessible. Judge
Pratter's
ruling ignores the plain language of the ADA, which provides that
discrimination occurs when a public transportation facility is not
made
accessible "upon completion" of renovations. As a result of this
ruling,
individuals who use wheelchairs and other individuals with mobility
impairments are unable to use these stations, which are major
connection
points in the local transportation system. The U.S. Justice
Department has
filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiff on its appeal to the
Third
Circuit, explaining that Judge Pratter's ruling is wrong and conflicts
with
the clear language of the ADA.
We are extremely concerned about the prospect of elevating a federal
judge
who seems to have a disparaging attitude toward important rights of
individuals with disabilities. Both of these rulings demonstrate a
willingness to dismiss claims to enforce critical rights of
individuals with
disabilities based on procedural concerns that are simply not
warranted.
Moreover, we believe that none of the pending controversial judicial
nominations, including Judge Pratter's, should be acted upon at this
stage.
The Senate should follow its longstanding policy that nominations are
not
processed in a presidential election year unless they are
uncontroversial.
Federal courts have inappropriately rolled back many important rights
of
people with disabilities, and the nomination of controversial nominees
who
are hostile to civil rights must come to an end. Accordingly, the
nominations of Judge Pratter and all other controversial nominees
should not
be acted upon.
_____
_____
To unsubscribe/change profile: click here
<http://www.mailermailer.com/x?u=50512722q-d3dd0b01> .
To subscribe: click here <http://www.mailermailer.com/x?oid=12501t> .
National Coalition for Disability Rights
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 300
Washington, District of Columbia 20004
<http://m1e.net/c?50512722-pJQVT8yLZeqoc%403053139-sng9VoOHKYKik>
_____
Email list management powered by http://MailerMailer.com
_____
[1][1] No. Civ.A. 04-5659, 2005 WL 2562724 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 11, 2005),
rev'd,
163 Fed. Appx. 93 (3d Cir. 2005).
[2][2] No. 03-CV-1577, 2006 WL 3392733 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 17, 2006)
(appeal
pending).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Nfbkabs mailing list
Nfbkabs at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbkabs
-------------- next part --------------
I shouldn't think NFB would want to get involved with campaigns such as that below, or at least IMO we ought to check with Jim McCarthy before acting.
Just my opinion.
Mike Freeman, President
NFB of Washington
----- Original Message -----
From:
mailto:sjgc at mis.net Shannon Caldwell
To:
mailto:nfbk at yahoogroups.com nfbk at yahoogroups.com
; mailto:nfbkl at yahoogroups.com nfbkl at yahoogroups.com
; mailto:nfbkabs at nfbnet.org nfbkabs at nfbnet.org
; mailto:hklein at uky.edu hklein at uky.edu
; mailto:kjone at email.uky.edu kjone at email.uky.edu
; mailto:awilson at uky.edu awilson at uky.edu
; mailto:j.glisson at insightbb.com j.glisson at insightbb.com
; mailto:pglisson at independenceplaceky.org pglisson at independenceplaceky.org
; mailto:ksbalum at yahoogroups.com ksbalum at yahoogroups.com
; mailto:kadb at yahoogroups.com kadb at yahoogroups.com
; mailto:janisk.friend at ky.gov janisk.friend at ky.gov
; mailto:sarahf.richardson at ky.gov sarahf.richardson at ky.gov
; mailto:dfb-src at yahoogroups.com dfb-src at yahoogroups.com
Sent:
Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:43 PM
Subject:
[Nfbkabs] FW: [coca] FW: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop JudgeGene Pratter
FYI
Please share and act accordingly.
Shannon Caldwell
mailto:sjgc at mis.net sjgc at mis.net
_____
I've stopped 2,924 spam and fraud messages. You can too!
Free trial of spam and fraud protection at http://www.cloudmark.com www.cloudmark.com
< http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7 http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7
>
< http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7 http://www.cloudmark.com/sigs?rc=tgrc7
> Cloudmark Desktop - Join the fight
against spam!
-----Original Message-----
From: mailto:coca-bounces at aucd.org coca-bounces at aucd.org
[mailto:coca-bounces at aucd.org] On Behalf Of
Gordon Richins
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 3:56 PM
To: mailto:coca at aucd.org coca at aucd.org
; mailto:pnpolicy at iglou.com pnpolicy at iglou.com
Subject: [coca] FW: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop Judge Gene Pratter
_____
From: ADA Watch [mailto:JimWard at ADAwatch.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 1:42 PM
To: mailto:gordon at cpd2.usu.edu gordon at cpd2.usu.edu
Subject: Action Alert: Urge Congress to Stop Judge Gene Pratter
Action Alert: Campaign for Fair Judges
ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR)
Take Action:
Contact Senate Judiciary Committee Members
Message:
1. "Oppose Judge Gene Pratter to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals."
2. "Don't Consider Controversial Judicial Nominees During Presidential
Election Year."
Rationale:
The confirmation of extremist judicial nominees to has led to the further
weakening of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and other civil
rights protections. We believe that none of the pending controversial
judicial nominations, including Judge Gene Pratter to the Third Circuit
Court of Appeals, should be acted upon.
The Senate should follow its longstanding policy that judicial nominations
are not processed in a presidential election year unless they are
uncontroversial. Federal courts have inappropriately rolled back many
important rights of people with disabilities, and the nomination of
controversial nominees who are hostile to civil rights must come to an end.
Accordingly, the nominations of Judge Pratter and all other controversial
nominees should not be acted upon.
Contact Information:
Please voice your concerns to Senate Committee on the Judiciary Chairman
Senator Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member Senator Arlen Specter, and all
committee members. Contact information can be found at:
http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm
< http://m1e.net/c?50512722-WbiMY4JeyHdZE%403053134-ivJlSUPNZAfuM http://m1e.net/c?50512722-WbiMY4JeyHdZE%403053134-ivJlSUPNZAfuM
>
Background Information:
DISABILITY RIGHTS GROUPS OPPOSE THE
NOMINATION OF GENE PRATTER
ADA Watch, National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR), National Council
for Independent Living (NCIL), Liberty Resources and the Bazelon Center for
Mental Health Law oppose the nomination of Gene E.K. Pratter to the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals. We are deeply troubled by certain rulings by
Judge Pratter that demonstrate a dismissive attitude toward the rights of
people with disabilities. In light of Judge Pratter's controversial record,
her nomination should not be acted upon in an election year.
Judge Pratter, a member of the Federalist Society, has been a federal judge
in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania since she was confirmed in 2004,
after being nominated by President George W. Bush. During her several years
on the bench, Judge Pratter has authored decisions that are of grave concern
to disability rights advocates.
In Phillips v. Sheraton Society Hill,[1][1] Judge Pratter dismissed an ADA
employment discrimination case brought by a man with a back injury. Judge
Pratter failed to apply the federal courts' customary solicitude for the
rights of litigants who are not represented by counsel, and dismissed the
case on her own motion because the man's complaint did not indicate whether
he had exhausted his administrative remedies (that is, whether he had first
given the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission a chance to investigate
his claim). Judge Pratter dismissed the case without permitting Phillips,
who was unrepresented, to amend his complaint to demonstrate that he had
filed a complaint with the EEOC and received a "right to sue" letter.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that dismissal was
inappropriate: "We are troubled by the fact that Phillips was given no
opportunity to amend the Complaint before the District Court sua sponte
dismissed it. Phillips' failure as a pro se litigant to allege exhaustion
does not warrant dismissal of this action with prejudice..We cannot assume
from [his] pro se complaint that no right-to-sue letter exists or that he
failed to exhaust his administrative remedies merely because he failed to
attach a right-to-sue letter." The appeals court also noted that Phillips
had filed a form complaint that did not require him to affirmatively state
that he had exhausted administrative remedies. Judge Pratter's harsh ruling
suggests an indifference to the financial realities faced by many people
with disabilities, who may not be able to afford representation in order to
challenge disability discrimination, but who may not be familiar with the
procedural requirements of federal court litigation.
In Disabled in Action v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation
Authority,[2][2] Judge Pratter dismissed a disability rights group's claims
seeking to require the Philadelphia area transit authority to comply with
the ADA by making two major subway stations accessible to people with
disabilities. These stations were required to be accessible because they
had undergone substantial renovations. Judge Pratter held that the
plaintiff's ADA claims were barred because they were filed too late. She
held that the statute of limitations began running from the time that the
plaintiff and its lawyer knew that the transit authority did not plan to
make the stations accessible, rather than from the time that the renovations
were completed without making the stations accessible. Judge Pratter's
ruling ignores the plain language of the ADA, which provides that
discrimination occurs when a public transportation facility is not made
accessible "upon completion" of renovations. As a result of this ruling,
individuals who use wheelchairs and other individuals with mobility
impairments are unable to use these stations, which are major connection
points in the local transportation system. The U.S. Justice Department has
filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiff on its appeal to the Third
Circuit, explaining that Judge Pratter's ruling is wrong and conflicts with
the clear language of the ADA.
We are extremely concerned about the prospect of elevating a federal judge
who seems to have a disparaging attitude toward important rights of
individuals with disabilities. Both of these rulings demonstrate a
willingness to dismiss claims to enforce critical rights of individuals with
disabilities based on procedural concerns that are simply not warranted.
Moreover, we believe that none of the pending controversial judicial
nominations, including Judge Pratter's, should be acted upon at this stage.
The Senate should follow its longstanding policy that nominations are not
processed in a presidential election year unless they are uncontroversial.
Federal courts have inappropriately rolled back many important rights of
people with disabilities, and the nomination of controversial nominees who
are hostile to civil rights must come to an end. Accordingly, the
nominations of Judge Pratter and all other controversial nominees should not
be acted upon.
_____
_____
To unsubscribe/change profile: click here
< http://www.mailermailer.com/x?u=50512722q-d3dd0b01 http://www.mailermailer.com/x?u=50512722q-d3dd0b01
> .
To subscribe: click here < http://www.mailermailer.com/x?oid=12501t http://www.mailermailer.com/x?oid=12501t
> .
National Coalition for Disability Rights
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 300
Washington, District of Columbia 20004
< http://m1e.net/c?50512722-pJQVT8yLZeqoc%403053139-sng9VoOHKYKik http://m1e.net/c?50512722-pJQVT8yLZeqoc%403053139-sng9VoOHKYKik
>
_____
Email list management powered by http://MailerMailer.com http://MailerMailer.com
_____
[1][1] No. Civ.A. 04-5659, 2005 WL 2562724 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 11, 2005), rev'd,
163 Fed. Appx. 93 (3d Cir. 2005).
[2][2] No. 03-CV-1577, 2006 WL 3392733 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 17, 2006) (appeal
pending).
_______________________________________________
Nfbkabs mailing list
mailto:Nfbkabs at nfbnet.org Nfbkabs at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbkabs http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbkabs
More information about the Nfbkabs
mailing list