141
submitted 1 year ago by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Dude, literally nobody here is calling for the abolishment of the ADA "and it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise." What they are complaining about is how easy it is to abuse reporting, which hurts both the business serving a market and the people who the ADA is designed to help.

[-] kitonthenet@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

abolishment of the ADA

Except that’s precisely what the case is about, everyone commenting here is against this form of enforcement, so yes that’s exactly what’s happening. If a business is non compliant my only remedy is to sue them to make them compliant.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

My dude, you keep on walking headfirst into the point:

everyone commenting here is against this form of enforcement

Yes, that's what the commenters on this story are complaining about, not the concept of the ADA itself.

Absent changes to how businesses can have these complaints enforced on them,

This right here is what the other posters want to see changed. Don't conflate posters here agreeing with the article's point (that the enforcement mechanism in the ADA is easy to abuse for bad-faith litigants) with people who want to see the ADA gone.

[-] kitonthenet@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago

Then change the law. Absent a change in law, what you're advocating for is making the ADA gone.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Then change the law

Holy fucking god, that's the point we've all been making. The ADA should not allow assholes like the ones going before SCOTUS to exist. Once again, you've walked right into the point.

Absent a change in law, what you're advocating for is making the ADA gone.

I literally said the exact opposite of this.

[-] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

That’s not true, in most cases you can let the company know and they’ll correct the issue themselves without court order because they likely didn’t even think of the scenario. My work has had to build/move/change several things over the years as different parts of the business are noticed to not be accessible

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

The ADA needs government regulators. But it was signed into law by a Republican president, having been "compromised" to be "bipartisan" (had its balls cut off by Republicans).

this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
141 points (97.3% liked)

politics

18904 readers
3123 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS