Court plans ruling on disabilities

Fla. suit pits states against U.S. law

Saturday, 22 January 2000

http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/080-5069.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court said yesterday it will decide by July whether state employees are protected by a federal anti-discrimination law, the Americans With Disabilities Act.
Just 11 days ago, the justices barred all state employees across the nation from suing in federal court over age bias. Now, Florida officials are urging them to rule that Congress likewise exceeded its power by giving all state employees the right to sue in federal court over the ADA.
The court will hear arguments in the Florida case in April.
Its Jan. 11 decision whittled away more of the federal government's power over states, perpetuating a series of decisions legal scholars say comprise a states'-rights revolution.
That 5-4 ruling said Congress had exceeded its authority when allowing state employees to sue their bosses under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act because the law cannot trump states' 11th Amendment immunity against being sued in federal courts.
On Monday, the justices ordered federal appeals courts in Illinois and New York to restudy rulings that said states and their agencies must abide by a 1963 federal law that requires employers to give men and women equal pay for equal work.
In those orders, the court said the courts should reconsider their decisions in light of the Jan. 11 decision barring age-bias lawsuits in federal courts by state employees.
Florida prison guard Wellington Dickson sued in federal court after failing to get a promotion, saying he was discriminated against because of his age and his heart condition. His lawsuit invoked the two laws aimed at discrimination based on age and disabilities.
The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said his claims under both laws could proceed to trial, but the Supreme Court reversed that part of the decision dealing with the age-bias law.
The court also said it will decide whether states can let voters cross party lines in primary elections, even over the political parties' objections.
The court will hear an appeal by four California political parties - the Democratic Party, Republican Party, Libertarian Party and Peace and Freedom Party - that say the state's ``blanket primary'' law violates their members' right to choose their own nominees.
The parties say the blanket primary law, overwhelmingly approved by California voters in 1996, violates their constitutional right of political association.
The justices will hear arguments in April, and a decision is expected by July.
Three other states - Alaska, Louisiana and Washington - have similar primary laws. A number of other states have more limited open-primary laws, in which voters can request the ballot of any political party in a primary election.
The law lets people vote in primary elections for any candidate of any party.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------