[blindLaw] limitation on blind attorneys

Mon Aug 3 21:42:51 UTC 2020

Hi,
I serve as the Chair of the Blind Federal Employment Committee, and someone asked us to look into your question a few years ago.  Essentially, as others have said on this list, JAG Corps attorneys are required to be combat and deployment ready at any time.  They are sometimes assigned duties that have physical requirements that relate to combat.  I'm familiar with dozens of such attorneys personally who have to do everything from munitions to driving tanks to repelling into dangerous areas.  That is not to say that blind people couldn't do those things, but as the laws are currently written, blind people are not permitted to do those things and the argument made is that accommodations would so fundamentally change the nature of the work so as to render this an undue hardship on the agencies.  

Because attorneys can serve in the defense fields and agencies without being JAG officers, including prosecuting cases before military tribunals, the argument is that people with disabilities are not in fact shut out of this sort of work.  The argument the Government makes is that there are two parallel tracks - one as a JAG Corps member and one as a civilian, both with significantly similar duties distinguished only by the combat readiness component.  There are a number of blind attorneys throughout DOD.  

So I suppose the question I would want to know is: What specific areas to you believe blind people are being shut out of in the defense lawyering arena?  If we had a better idea of where those areas are, perhaps we could work to make sure that blind people are able to get those jobs.  Or is it the nature of JAG work itself that you think should be opened up to the blind?  If so, that's going to need to be a legislative and regulatory fix, not simply an education and advocacy one.

Ronza Othman, President
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland
443-426-4110
Pronouns: she, her, hers

-----Original Message-----
From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tim Elder via BlindLaw
Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 4:54 PM
To: 'Derek Manners' <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>; 'Blind Law Mailing List' <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Cc: tim at timeldermusic.com
Subject: Re: [blindLaw] limitation on blind attorneys

I am for a partial integration tailored to other factors.  It seems like environments in which civilian contractors are permitted should also be opened for other classes of enlisted people.  We have varying degrees of national security clearance.  Perhaps degrees of enlistment are appropriate.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Manners <dmanners at jd16.law.harvard.edu>
Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2020 8:52 AM
To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [blindLaw] limitation on blind attorneys

Hi all,

I worked at DOD office of the general counsel, international affairs division my 1L summer. I was welcomed with open arms and had an awesome experience. But, and despite my bosses wanted it to be possible, I was not able to do JAG. But there are plenty of opportunities to otherwise be a lawyer in the national security space. 

Best regards
Derek 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 27, 2020, at 12:08 PM, Aser Tolentino via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> FYI If you are interested in serving with the JAG Corps, they do have civilian attorneys who augment the uniform component of the organization. Also, a myriad of defense department agencies have their own legal staff that handle mission-specific matters like contracting or compliance.
> While I believe diversity and representation dramatically strengthen organizations that make them core values, I think it is important to note that essential job functions of a commissioned officer in the armed forces, even those who are not line officers, involve tasks that would be difficult to accommodate. As to the likelihood of serving in deployed units, JAGs are expected to deploy just like everyone else. I have a friend who is a USAF JAG. As part of a previous assignment, she was responsible for ensuring that work was being done in accordance with contract requirements. This involved visiting remote locations in Afghanistan, accessible only via helicopter. There was a great deal of humor had when the DoD formally announced women could serve in combat: they’d been serving in combat, just not in combat positions. In a world of asymmetric warfare and green on blue incidents, I don’t think downplaying the risks to personnel is a good idea. Opening up the combat arms has sparked some serious debates about what is and is not essential about qualification standards. It’s an ongoing dialogue, but I think practically speaking, there are reasons to temper expectations here.
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 27, 2020, at 5:56 AM, Sarah Badillo via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> That’s true, but first, they never actually gave them the chance to 
>> see if they could. Second, how many army lawyers actually serve in 
>> combat? How many army lawyers have in the past served in combat?
>> Also, in the future, are they really going to put army lawyers in 
>> combat? Third, these days with all of the push for equality, the one 
>> thing that people need to realize is that equality is not there when 
>> it suits a person and eliminated when it doesn’t. Equality is a 
>> quality for everyone whether or not someone agrees with it. I think 
>> that as I said, there’s a whole opportunity that both the prospective lawyer and the military misses out on.
>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 8:40 AM Cody Davis <cjdavis9193 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I considered this career path when I was in law school. I reached 
>>> out to a recruiter explaining my situation and could not get a 
>>> response. From what I have read online, even though you’re not in a 
>>> combat position, all officers must be able to serve in a combat position if needed.
>>> 
>>> I would have love to serve as a JAG officer if it were possible. 
>>> Maybe permit it is a better word to use than possible.
>>> 
>>> Warmly,
>>> Cody
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 27, 2020, at 8:28 AM, ---------- via BlindLaw <
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello, I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for this but I 
>>>> have a
>>> question slash comment that in a way  pertains to attorneys. Over 
>>> the past few years and months, many changes have taken place that 
>>> forced society to re-examine its beliefs and actions regarding 
>>> diversity and inclusion.  I believe the blind must also be equally 
>>> included. While not all blind attorneys choose to take this path, 
>>> some may wish, like there sighted colleagues, to join the jag core.
>>> or in other words, become an army lawyer. While I'm not trying to 
>>> glamorize this position, it may carry with it a range of benefits.
>>> The vast majority of what army lawyers do is lawyering like any 
>>> other attorney. Since a lot of positions in the military are non 
>>> combat positions, and the vast majority of army lawyers complete 
>>> there 20 years of duty without major incidents, in this modern age 
>>> of the year 2020, it shouldn't be unreasonable what with both 
>>> accommodations and inclusion to expect and accept that many blind 
>>> lawyers are just as capable of being army lawyers rather then 
>>> civilian if they choose to. I  I commented on this in this list 
>>> because this concerns  attorneys which is the topic of this list. All legal careers should be open to those who are blind or visually impaired. I have read that there is at least 1 in Israel.
>>> Finally, there is a wealth of attorneys who's knowledge and skill is 
>>> being unused and who if they even wish to become this kind of 
>>> attorney are being kept out. ∫ are simply my thoughts. The views are 
>>> my own and do not reflect those of others.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> BlindLaw mailing list
>>>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>> for
>>> BlindLaw:
>>>> 
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjdavis9193%40
>>> gmail.com
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> BlindLaw mailing list
>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino%40g
>> mail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dmanners%40jd16.
> law.harvard.edu

_______________________________________________
BlindLaw mailing list
BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmail.com