About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

52 Rutgers L. Rev. 1121 (1999-2000)
Adding Insult to Injury: Discriminatory Intent as a Prerequisite to Damages under the ADA

handle is hein.journals/rutlr52 and id is 1131 raw text is: ADDING INSULT TO INJURY: DISCRIMINATORY INTENT AS A PREREQUISITE TO DAMAGES UNDER THE ADA Sande Buhai* and Nina Golden** In this Article, Professors Buhai and Golden argue that proof of discriminatory intent is not required for a plaintiff to receive compensatory damages under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Professors Buhai and Golden begin their examination of this Act by looking to the congressional purpose and intent behind its formation. They then explore case precedent and find that while courts have drawn parallels between Title II and both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, such comparisons are unfounded and have resulted in incorrect decisions and inappropriate precedent. Based on their in-depth examination, the authors conclude that since the American with Disabilities Act was intended to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities, to achieve this goal, all appropriate remedies, including compensatory damages, must be available to plaintiffs. INTRODUCTION The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was intended to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities. In particular, Title II of the ADA precludes state and local governments from discriminating against people with disabilities. This Article argues that compensatory damages are permitted under Title II without a showing of discriminatory intent. This must be the case in order for the ADA to function as Congress intended. State and local govern- ments cannot claim ignorance of the law as an excuse to avoid compensatory damages for violating the ADA. The first section of this Article discusses Title II of the ADA, and its history, purpose, and application. It describes the Rehabilitation * Clinical Professor, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles. B.A. English, UCLA, 1979; J.D., cum laude, Loyola Law School, 1982. I would like to express my appreciation to the staff and editors of the Rutgers Law Review and to Loyola Law School for its support. My deepest gratitude to my husband, Professor Theodore Seto, for his insightful comments and generous assistance. ** Assistant Professor, California State University, Northridge. B.A, cum laude, Cornell, 1987; M.A. in Deaf Studies, CSUN, 1991; J.D., USD, 1994. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance and support of my husband, Jason Rosenbaum. 1121

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most