BISHOP BARBER SUES
AMC THEATER CHAIN
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
Civil rights activist Bishop William Barber has announced that he has filed a federal lawsuit against AMC Theaters for what his attorney, Harry Daniels, claims was an “injustice” when the management of the AMC Theater in Greenville allegedly forced Barber to leave the theater after he brought his own special chair to watch a movie with his 90-year-old mother in December 2023.
Bishop Barber says he suffers from a form of arthritis known as ankylosing spondylitis, and thus cannot use regular seating when he attends events, such as at the White House. So he brings his own stool, and is usually allowed to chose a place to sit without argument.
In fact, it is the law that he and other handicapped individuals under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - “…a federal civil rights law (passed in 1990) that prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in everyday activities.”
As reported last year when the incident occurred, in Bishop Barber’s case, he was specifically protected because, under federal law, “…to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities….that they encounter in everyday life….businesses that are open to the public …have to follow (certain) requirements of the ADA.”
The ADA is broken up into five different sections called "titles.”
Under ADA Title III, businesses serving the public, like restaurants, hotels, retail stores and movie theaters “…must provide people with disabilities an equal opportunity to access the goods and services that they offer."
In Bishop Barber’s case, because he required the special high chair that he brought with him, AMC theater management should have helped him decide where it would have been best placed to not only ensure his safety and comfort while viewing the film with his mother, but the safety and comfort of audience members sitting around him.
Instead, theater management decided to violate the ADA, allegedly not even try to accommodate Barber, and called the police to escort him out, alleging that he was trespassing, even though he paid good money for his tickets. The police were never needed if AMC management knew the law.
Effectively, the AMC theater in Greenville violated Bishop Barber’s civil rights as a disabled American, legal observers say. The ADA did not require Barber to call ahead to notify the theater that he was coming, or what his needs might be. They were required serve him sight unseen as they would any other paying patron.
AMC subsequently apologized to Bishop Barber for how he was treated, but that’s not stopping Barber’s federal lawsuit against the popular theater chain.
"This is a race issue - a human race issue. At some point, if you are blessed to live long enough, you may find yourself in a similar situation," Atty. Daniels said. "Make no mistake: this was an injustice, not just to Bishop Barber, but to all of us. Every family knows someone who needs additional accommodations."
Bishop Barber’s lawsuit seeks $100,000 in damages.
"I know Reverend Barber is focused on is accountability and [the] treatment of others, and that's what we're pushing for," Atty. Daniels said.
-30-
REPORT ALLEGEDS UNC TRUSTEES
KEEP TABS ON CERTAIN APPLICANTS
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
At least 15 trustees of the UNC- Chapel Hill Board of Trustees regularly inquire about certain applicants to the school, asking for updates from administration officials, according to a recent report from The News and Observer newspaper. Record obtained and reviewed by the N&O reportedly shows some UNC trustee board members regularly texting university officials during the 2023-24 year to receive application status updates, including the probability of said applicant ultimately being admitted to the school, even from a waitlist.
The N&O reports that the text messages “span more than 100 pages of screenshots, are heavily redacted, with the names and identities of applicants obscured.” So that makes it unclear how prospective UNC students are being inquired about, or how many time a single applicant is being asked about. It also is unclear what the direct relationship student applicants have with the inquiring trustee board member.
In many cases, it is also hard to determine whether the inquiring trustee board member is acting on behalf of a friend or family member. In any case, there appears to be no instance of any trustee board member using his or her influence to either force the admission of a student applicant, or stop an admission, the paper reports.
“In some cases, though, the trustees appeared to weigh in with their perceptions of the students and their academic record or athletic accomplishments. The trustees’ communication with administrators during the admissions process could raise questions about whether the trustees are unduly influencing officials’ decisions — even if they do not intend to do so — or otherwise getting involved in the process in an unauthorized way,” the N&O reports. “ But the communications could also represent some board members’ growing frustration with the length of time it takes for students on the waitlist to receive a decision about their admission.”
According to the N&O, “In the UNC System, trustees are expected to serve as advisers to the university’s chancellor, but are not authorized to direct “matters of administration,” as system President Peter Hans reminded the UNC trustees in a memo earlier this year. UNC is a member of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), a national organization that provides guidance on board governance, according to the organization’s membership database. When it comes to admissions, AGB President Fram Virjee told The News & Observer, the roles of trustees should include “providing oversight for admissions and ensuring that the admissions process works properly,” among other tasks. Those roles should not include “getting involved in the day-to-day operations of admissions, and definitely not reviewing individual admissions decisions.”
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment