[nfb-talk] {Disarmed} Federal law preempts blind flyers' claims over airport kiosks

[Darian Smith]

Thank you for  sharing the link.  I wasn't refering to  you sharing
the article, I was refering to  what seems to be the one-sided nature
of the information given in the article.

On 5/23/11, Darian Smith <dsmithnfb at gmail.com> wrote:
> Oftly one-sided article, huh?
>
> On 5/23/11, Sherri <flmom2006 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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/dsmithnfb%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Darian Smith
> Skype: The_Blind_Truth
> Windows Live: Lightningrod2010 at live.com
> Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/goldengateace
>
> "The purpose of life is a life of purpose.
>
> — Robert Byrne
>


-- 
Darian Smith
Skype: The_Blind_Truth
Windows Live: Lightningrod2010 at live.com
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/goldengateace

"The purpose of life is a life of purpose.

— Robert Byrne