DOE V LSAC - 17-3230
With the help of the Color of Law Center and Michael L. Foreman
PENN STATE LAW, CIVIL RIGHTS APPELLATE CLINIC.
An unanimous three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal. Confirmed targeted discrimination and interference of federally protected rights by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Nitza I. Quinones Alejandro.
Jane Doe "Nobody wants to act as a lawyer; we do this because we can not afford to hire a lawyer or the fact our disability prevents lawyers from wanting us as clients." Our rights should not be forfeited because we cannot afford to enforce our rights."
Hardaway v. Hartford Public Works Dept 2nd Cir.,
With the help of the Color of Law Center: An unanimous three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived a lawsuit against the city of Hartford, Connecticut’s Department of Public Works by a former maintenance worker, Curtis Hardaway, who claims he was fired for complaining that he and other black employees were subjected to hazardous conditions.
HARDAWAY V. DC HOUSING AUTHORITY, NO. 14-7144 (D.C. CIR. 2016)
With the help of the Color of Law Center and GEORGETOWN LAW, CIVIL RIGHTS APPELLATE CLINIC.
A unanimous three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeal. Confirmed targeted discrimination and interference of federally protected rights by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
By forcing a non-lawyer to act as a lawyer for an Autistic American
By filing the pro se medical record on the public docket. Only given to the court to facilitate a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
continues to suffer the same injury that she sustained at the outset of the litigation by DC Housing Authority.
Circuit Judge TATEL-
"Instead, attempting to foist its burden onto the Hardaways, it argues that they have offered no evidence to prove that the Authority will rescind the voucher. Appellee’s Br. 19. This tactic ignores the Supreme Court’s command that “the party asserting mootness” must carry the “heavy burden” of proving mootness through cessation. Laidlaw, 528 U.S. at 189. At bottom, the Authority’s argument amounts to a meager “promise not to” revoke the voucher. See Kifafi v. Hilton Hotels Retirement Plan, 701 F.3d 718, 725 (D.C. Cir. 2012). Unfortunately for the Authority, courts never permit parties to deprive them of jurisdiction through a mere “wave of [the] hand.” Id. at 724."
MAKING A DIFFERENCE
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
Here at Color of Law Center, we are driven by a single goal giving a voice to the voiceless American. We are
progressive advocacy organizations founded to fight Judicial Misconduct and build a democratic society that implements the ideals of freedom, equality, opportunity and justice for all. We encourage civic participation, defend fundamental rights, and fight to dismantle systemic barriers to deny the most vulnerable Americans access to the federal civil court system.
At Color of Law Center, we are dedicated to art. We serve individuals with developmental and psychiatric disabilities who have an interest in art. We have pop up workshops in Connecticut, Washington DC, New York, Maryland and Virginia individuals with developmental and psychiatric disabilities who have an interest in art.
Would you like to support our efforts?