Abstract

In this discussion of recent key disability-related decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court (1995– 2004), we (a) assess whether the Court has supported or undermined certain core concepts of disability policy and (b) examine how the Court balances the comparative rights of those with and those without disabilities. In cases involving employment discrimination, family law, and access to courts and other public decision-making entities, the Court adopts an idealized version of a previous America. We explain the Court's “reverie” for that version, resorting to the constructs known as (a) compelled confrontation and remission to majoritarian processes and (b) advancement of personal relationships.

You do not currently have access to this content.