[Blindtlk] [nfb-talk] {Disarmed} Federal law preempts blind flyers' claims over airport kiosks
Chris Nusbaum
dotkid.nusbaum at gmail.com
Tue May 24 19:58:18 UTC 2011
And back to court we go... just to be dismissed! Hope they
appeal!
Chris
"A loss of sight, never a loss of vision!" (Camp Abilities motto)
--- Sent from my BrailleNote
---- Original Message ------
From: "Sherri" <flmom2006 at gmail.com
Subject: [nfb-talk] {Disarmed} Federal law preempts blind flyers'
claims over airport kiosks
Date sent: Tue, 24 May 2011 02:22:38 -0400
I'm sure we'll think of some other way to solve this problem.
Sherri
Westlaw Journal Aviation
Federal law preempts blind flyers' claims over airport kiosks
5/23/2011 COMMENTS (0)
May 23 (Westlaw Journals) - Federal law preempts a class action
brought by
the National Federation of the Blind and several visually
impaired people
over the accessibility of airport ticketing kiosks, a California
federal
judge has ruled.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of
California
dismissed the NFB's lawsuit, finding the claims preempted by the
Air Carrier
Access Act and the Airline Deregulation Act.
The NFB and other plaintiffs alleged United Airlines violates
California
disability law by failing to make airport ticketing kiosks
accessible to the
blind.
According to the complaint, the kiosks employ a visual computer
screen with
prompts and touch-screen navigation but do not offer an audio
output or
other medium to make the kiosks accessible to the blind.
The plaintiffs brought their class action on behalf of all
legally blind
people in the United States who have flown on United from a
California
airport and have been unable to use the airline's kiosks.
United moved for dismissal, arguing that the Airline Deregulation
Act and
the Air Carrier Access Act preempt the plaintiffs' claims.
Judge Alsup agreed.
The claims are field-preempted under the ACAA because the
Department of
Transportation pervasively regulates airport kiosk accessibility,
he said.
In addition, the Airline Deregulation Act expressly preempts the
claims
because they defendants provide an airline "service" as defined
in the
statute.
Finally, the judge rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the
Airline
Deregulation Act was meant to target airline deregulation rather
than
discrimination.
"The Airline Deregulation Act unequivocally declares that no
state may enact
a law related to airline service," the Judge Alsup said.
"Congress could
have drawn the preemption provision more narrowly. It did not."
National Federation of the Blind et al. v. United Airlines
Inc., No. C
10-04816 WHA, 2011 WL 1544524 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2011).
(Reporting by Jennifer Long, Westlaw Journal Aviation)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Register or log in to comment.
© 2011 Thomson Reuters
a.. Co
Have you visited my personal page at
http://www.raceforindependence.org/goto/Sherri.Brun
If so, Thank you for changing what it means to be blind.
If not, please go there now!
Thank you.
flmom2006 at gmail.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/dotkid.
nusbaum%40gmail.com
More information about the BlindTlk
mailing list