ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, June 21, 1996 TAG: 9606210036
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: Knight-Ridder/Tribune
NOTE: Below
The federal government, unlike states or private organizations, cannot be forced to pay damages for discriminating against disabled people, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 Thursday.
The court majority, relying entirely on the way Congress drafted a statute, brushed aside the complaint of dissenters that the decision had produced an ``implausible'' double standard.
It was a solid victory for the government; but Linda Kilb, a lawyer for the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, said she was ``very disappointed.''
The effect, she said, ``will be to weaken protection for people with disabilities'' who are victims of discrimination by federal agencies.
The ruling came in the case of a man who sought compensation for his unlawful dismissal from the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy after he was diagnosed as an insulin-dependent diabetic in 1991.
Officials said the man, James Griffin Lane of Vienna, Va., now 23, had a ``disqualifying condition'' and discharged him during his first year at the academy, which trains officers for the commercial merchant marine and armed forces.
Lane sued the government under the federal Rehabilitation Act, which protects disabled people from discrimination in federally funded programs. A federal judge ordered Lane's reinstatement and awarded $75,000 damages.
The government did not challenge the reinstatement order but appealed the damage award. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed and nullified the award.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court upheld the appeal court's decision that the government was not liable for damages.
Congress, in drafting the Rehabilitation Act, failed to state clearly that the government had surrendered its traditional ``sovereign immunity'' to damage suits, the justices said. Sovereign immunity is a centuries-old doctrine that in modern times generally means the government cannot be sued without its consent.
``The clarity of expression necessary to establish a waiver of the government's sovereign immunity against monetary damages ... is lacking in the text of the relevant provisions,'' Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote for the majority.
The Merchant Marine Academy, in Kings Point, N.Y., is run by the Maritime Administration, an executive agency within the Department of Transportation.
Justice John Paul Stevens, joined in a dissent by Stephen Breyer, said the court had misinterpreted the law and ignored ``the clear intent of Congress'' to authorize damages against a federal agency that discriminates against the disabled.
Lane is heading into his final year at the academy and, according to his mother, enjoying life on the high seas.
``He just seems to eat it up,'' Jacqueline Lane told Legal Times of Washington recently. ``He isn't sitting there holding his breath for the money.''
(EDITORS: NEXT 4 GRAFS OPTIONAL TRIM) I'd like to keep next 3 grafs if possible-mfk-
In 1992, a unanimous Supreme Court permitted students to recover damages for sex discrimination from federally supported schools.
At the time, civil rights lawyers said the decision, by implication, also entitled disabled people to obtain compensation not only for discrimination by states and other recipients of federal money, but also for illegal bias committed directly by federal agencies.
But that theory was wrong, the high court justices ruled.
LENGTH: Medium: 71 linesby CNB