Disability Community Outraged by Judicial Nomination
Feature Story by Lydia Edwards - 1/31/2003
On January 29, 2003 the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings for three judicial nominees, including the controversial nomination of Mr. Jeffrey Sutton. Currently more than 200 national civil rights groups oppose Sutton’s nomination. The largest outcry has come from the disability community, who believe his confirmation would represent a "rolling back" of their rights.The American Association of People with Disabilities and the National Coalition for Disability Rights both oppose Sutton’s confirmation due to his efforts to dismantle the federal power of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), and other vital civil rights laws, essentially weakening the power of Congress. According to the National Coalition for Disability Rights Mr. Sutton has "clearly taken an ideological stance against providing effective remedies under federal law for disadvantaged persons."
Sutton is a leader in the Federalist Society, a conservative organization that believes in strict interpretation of the constitution and limited government. The call for states’ rights historically has been used to block desegregation, The New Deal, and equal education while limiting the federal government’s chance to remedy and redress discrimination.
If confirmed, Sutton would serve for life; therefore, it is important that his record be scrutinized. Sutton represented the University of Alabama in University of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 (2001) where he commented that he intended "challenge the ADA across the board" and went on to assert that the ADA was "not needed." In this case a woman alleged she had been fired from the state university hospital because she had breast cancer, and sought redress under the ADA. Sutton argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of the state, and in a 5-4 decision the Court ruled that it was not with in the ADA’s power to allow discrimination lawsuits from state employees.
Many wonder about Sutton's ability to make unbiased decisions, especially concerning disability claims and federal civil rights enforcement. It is important to note that many times it has taken federal intervention to assure the basic rights of American citizens. By limiting Congress’ power to enact meaningful civil rights legislation, Sutton may leave many people without any recourse to fight discrimination.
