this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
27 points (100.0% liked)

Disability and Accessibility

905 readers
13 users here now

All things disability and accessibility related, and advocacy for making those things better.

See also this community's sister subs Feminism, LGBTQ+, Neurodivergence, and POC.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So I was reading this article about Trump's crackdown on DEIA initiatives, and I must admit, I didn't know what the A stands for in that acronym. So I looked it up and and it's accessibility.

Which raises the question: doesn't killing accessibility programs violate the Americans with Disabilities Act? To my knowledge, the ADA is still very much in force.

Another possible angle to mete some justice to this depressing heartless man...

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago

Which raises the question: doesn’t killing accessibility programs violate the Americans with Disabilities Act? To my knowledge, the ADA is still very much in force.

most likely: yes, but conservatives largely disapprove of the ADA and think it is an onerous government regulation, so they are in favor of dismantling and gutting it by any means necessary. this should be thought of more as a feature, not a bug

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Do you think he cares? He just acts and hopes that the courts side with him like last time

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (2 children)

What else other than trying to bury him in lawsuits to frustrate his destructive efforts can you do this side of the law?

[–] Darkassassin07 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Note how I very deliberately added "this side of the law" in my rhetorical question.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

What makes you think that limiting yourself to following a structure of laws that the ruling class themselves ignore will result in useful opposition?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

The law is still mostly fair. Not all of it is, but most of it. By following the law, we are better than those who don't.

The time to ignore the law is when the law itself becomes unjust. We are not there just quite yet.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

For some, the law is already unjust (see push to deport legal immigrants, treatment of LGBT+/disabled people by federal law, etc).

Anyway, if Luigi hats are out of stock, you could find a red one instead and say you're his brother or something.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

The 1% is trying to take over the systems, so they can reduce their costs to corrupt, the ROI on buying elections is pretty good...

The idea of the law is potentially fair
In practice the engaging narrative wins
I'm glad that the legal opposition is fighting
Flooding the zone makes it into a battle of legal resources

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What makes you think they think otherwise? The specification made it pretty clear they’re aware imo

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Usually people don't ask for options to follow the law unless they want to follow the law. I suppose you've got a point though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Take a F Fascist with you

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Until they make it illegal, of course.

Then we riot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Then we riot.

Well that's definitely a-okay.