So, if he'd been a solid but unlucky citizen, fairly new in town with no close friends, who slipped on the sidewalk, should he have to crawl up the steps?

Anybody who has had to deal with the strictures of the ADA knows how they go WELL beyond even ensuring that Harry's mythical "invisile disabled" does not have to crawl over slimy stair steps. One of its most "gotcha" requirements is that of often requiring "mainstreaming". In essence, to go back to Harry's example, let's say such person attended a theme park that had a costly, but not ADA-ready, transportation system from hotels to attractions; and the hotels decided it was most cost-effective to provide chauffeur services for the disabled instead of retrofitting ramps, inconveniencing guests with lengthy stops, etc; this would not be allowed because it would "deprive" the disabled from experiencing the ride to the attractions like all other able odied people -- "mainstreaming". Not quite a society where "invisile disabled" should feel exceedingly left out.

Harry:

No, he'd have had to ask for help. It appears folks were prepared to render it.

I don't think anyone should have to ask for help to access a courtroom in Tennessee. It's too bad that Lane is such an SOB, and yes, the ADA does go too far in some instances, but this isn't one of the them.

Has there been a constitutional amendment
preventing private charity? It's degrading
to take an offer for help from a private citizen
but its okay to leach off the state???

A culture where government is asked to solve such problems for us rather than relying on human relations to get around them is of dubious value.

It looks like a control issue.

Why stoop to asking for help when you can get the government to compel the same people to help you?

There is another plaintiff in the case, a court reporter who is wheelchair bound, and she has similar problems at a number of courthouses in our state. Basically, some of our more rural counties won't spend a dime on anything unless someone makes them. It is a shame that the Federal government has to get involved, but regardless of whether the handicapped individual is sympathetic or not, they shouldn't have to suffer the indignity (as the Court Reporter repeatedly does) of having to get judges and other court officials to carry her into the courtroom.

There is another plaintiff in the case, a court reporter who is wheelchair bound, and she has similar problems at a number of courthouses in our state. Basically, some of our more rural counties won't spend a dime on anything unless someone makes them. It is a shame that the Federal government has to get involved, but regardless of whether the handicapped individual is sympathetic or not, they shouldn't have to suffer the indignity (as the Court Reporter repeatedly does) of having to get judges and other court officials to carry her into the courtroom.

In what sense is it an indignity to accept assistance rather than require every public building in America to spend money on generally unused access ramps and the like?

And the other funny thing about dignity is that it can be like fame and wealth--some people never have enough of it. A couple of years back the local social assistance authorities spent a fortune on adapting an apartment for a quadraplegic. Custom made this and that with no end of amazing gadgets. The purpose was so the tenant wouldn't have to suffer the "indignity" of living with someone.

Well, if you don't see the indignity that a female professional might feel in having to be carried to a courtroom while her peers walk, I guess there isn't much else I can say. If you read the local papers here, you would know that there are some court houses where she can't work because she hasn't had volunteers to help her. As far as being generally unused, I'm sorry, I'm a lawyer here in Tennessee, and I see lots of handicapped people using our court houses, as they have every rihgt to do.

Then it may make sense for them to have ramps, if there's a need. Here in NH they're on every podunk little post office and other federal building regardless of need.

There seems no need to impose such costs universally when folks with disabilities can be helped quite easily. The point being they do need halp and there's no shame in that.

"Well, if you don't see the indignity that a female professional might feel in having to be carried to a courtroom while her peers walk,"

An all purpose new age excuse. Works for suicide bombers too.

Daniel:

"If you read the local papers here, you would know that there are some court houses where she can't work because she hasn't had volunteers to help her."

You are there and I am not, but I find it incredible that she can't work because nobody can find two people to willingly spend two minutes to carry her chair up the stairs of a busy public building. I see that all the time and I've never known anyone to refuse or hesitate for a moment.

Everyone agrees that the determined disabled must be helped, but why is this a dignity issue? She is what she is. Is it an indignity for a blind person to need a hand crossing a busy street? Must we pay the huge costs of converting all traffic lights to sound to avoid this indignity? The point is you are allowing what is technologically possible to define human dignity irrespective of cost.

Well, I'm aware of alleged abuses of ADA.

But my point was, if it's an issue, it's an issue. The fact that the complainer is a jerk is not part of the issue, or should not be.

I see Professor Reynolds says there may be something in the state Constitution that would influence the outcome, regardless of ADA.

The attitudes of and towards the disabled are precisely the issue.

Justice, it is said, is blind.

But just where does it say it's crippled?

What do you mean "Gov't isn't responsible for ameliorating every bad break...". As a lifelong Democrat and New Dealer I've assumed that was the very essence of the state. As Dick Gephardt repeatedly points out: not everyone is a winner in the lottery of life.

BTW, more twisted ankles are caused by "handicapped friendly" sidewalk ramps to even remotely justify the imagined benefit to the wheel chair bound.

You could close all the public water fountains and when anyone is thirsty, he could just ask passersby if they have any Perrier on them.

Or you'd buy it from the hot dog vendor out front and support the local economy.