User:Naquach/National Federation of the Blind v. Target
 | This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution.
If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. |
Title III of the ADA and Public Accommodations[edit]
Article body[edit]
The Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law in 1990 with the intent of eliminating discrimination on the basis of disability. Some of the protections listed in the ADA for people with disabilities include the rights to equal use and enjoyment of places of public accommodations as non disabled people. Each title of the ADA provides people with disabilities different protections, Title III of the ADA is intentionally designed to forbid “discrimination against persons on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases, or operates a place of public accommodation.” [1]Under the ADA, “places of public accommodations” is defined as a place that is operated by a private entity which can be categorized into twelve groups. Some of these categories public entities cover include restaurants, parks, hospitals, museums, offices, theaters, hotels and stores.
Since the Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted before the internet existed, the term “public accommodation” has been historically interpreted as a physical place. The ADA does not clearly address accessibility to the internet for people with disabilities, as well as not clearly defining “public accommodations” as physical places. [2]Both the statue and the regulations implementing Title III by the Department of Justice do not mention the internet. From Congress broad definition of “public accommodations” and the internet being a new concept during the time the ADA was passed, issues on accessibility to the internet have become new and controversial. With little clarity from Congress and a lack of case law analyzing internet accessibility issues, has caused the accessibility to the internet to remain an unresolved issue. National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp has become one of the most recent court cases that has addressed and analyzed this issue.
References[edit]
Rozycki, Carla (November 2006). "National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp.: Its Potential Impact on Web Sites and Services" (PDF).
Protection Under Title III Continues To Expand Beyond Brick-And-Mortar Accommodation To The World Wide Web: “National Federation Of The Blind v. Target Corp.”(January 14, 2009). https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/employment-litigation-tribunals/72654/protection-under-title-iii-continues-to-expand-beyond-brick-and-mortar-accommodation-to-the-world-wide-web-national-federation-of-the-blind-v-target-corp-and-more
- ^ Rozycki, Carla (November 2006). "National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp.: Its Potential Impact on Web Sites and Services" (PDF).
{{cite web}}:|archive-date=requires|archive-url=(help)CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "Protection Under Title III Continues To Expand Beyond Brick-And-Mortar Accommodation To The World Wide Web: "National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp."". 14 January 2009.
{{cite web}}:|archive-date=requires|archive-url=(help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)