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!
1. 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.