Title I requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide qualified individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from the full range of employment-related opportunities available to others. For example, it prohibits discrimination in recruitment, hiring, promotions, training, pay, social activities, and other privileges of employment.

The ADA has three titles: Title 1 applies to employment, Title 2 applies to state and local governments (including public colleges and universities) and Title 3 applies to places of public accommodations (including private colleges and universities).

In the online classroom, all disabilities – whether readily evident or not – are in fact invisible and hidden.

os get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people’s hats o

Censorship and Information Control During Information RevolutionsExploring how new information technologies from the printing press to the digital age have stimulated new forms of censorship and information control.

为什 Ada 语言没有普及开？

Examples of such “alignmentof design and analytics” (ADA from now on)

The ADA intimidation claim and the § 1983 claim lack any legal foundation and “the result is obvious.” Karam, 352 F.3d at 1195. The ADA intimidation claim filed under 42 U.S.C. § 12203(b) had an outcome that was clear at the time it was filed. Section 12203(b) states: “It shall be unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by this chapter. ” (emphasis added). By its own terms, protection under the ADA against intimidation does not extend to a plaintiff's attempts to exercise rights granted or protected by the IDEA—the basis of K.S.'s claim in this case. See Morse v. N. Coast Opportunities, Inc., 118 F.3d 1338, 1343 (9th Cir.1997) (“Because [Plaintiff's] § 1983 complaint against [Defendant] is completely barred by the terms of the statute, we find that her claim is ‘unreasonable’ and ‘meritless.’ ”).

HighWire