Mastodawn

Hope Feb 27, 2025

@aardrian @LFLegal "The Biden-Harris Administration conflated longstanding, legally-required obligations related to disability accessibility and accommodation with DEI initiatives. President Trump’s executive orders require the elimination of discriminatory practices. Agencies should thus rescind policies and practices that are contrary to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973." I tend to think this is correct. In other words, DEI was mostly about race and/or gender before Biden/Harris. Nothing much about accessibility until then, accept for Dominos. Now, after the Biden admin, they want to blame a plane crash on us. Well they pretty much did.

@ladyhope They absolutely will change who they blame to fit their agenda. Disability simply has more existing case law behind it.

Also, I am not a lawyer.

@LFLegal

Hope Feb 27, 2025

@aardrian @LFLegal Yeah I suppose that's true!

@aardrian @LFLegal Whether or not I should be, I must admit I'm breathing a cautiously optimistic sigh of relief! It feels like possibly Allison and I won't lose our jobs, at least maybe not as soon as we thought.

@darrell73
Deferred, IMO.

@LFLegal

@aardrian @LFLegal Oh I'm not saying we shouldn't do everything we can to resist or that we should toss anyone under the bus... I wonder if some sort of deal was made, somebody important has a disabled family member or there's some other story under these changes.

@darrell73 My consulting experience suggests someone in the administration has a personal connection to a person who would be harmed. Or they’re mid-scam and want to see it to its end.

@LFLegal

Luke Rosenberger Feb 27, 2025

@aardrian @darrell73 @LFLegal Lainey's #axecon session tomorrow morning is going to be very interesting.

@lukethelibrarian
I suspect that talk was written well before last night’s post, so I wouldn’t expect it to wade into this (maybe a passing reference).

@darrell73 @LFLegal

Lainey Feingold Feb 27, 2025

@aardrian @lukethelibrarian @darrell73 I feel like the whole Talk almost was a passing reference. There was so much to cover. I did mention this article (added it in last night)

@LFLegal @aardrian @lukethelibrarian All this to say I'm watching all this as closely as I know how and I'm doing my best to be extremely careful with any messaging especially with Republican politicians. FWIW I agree disabilities shouldn't have to be advocated for in a separate compartment but like it or not that's exactly where I see this going at least for the next 4 years.

Paul Feb 27, 2025

@aardrian @darrell73 @LFLegal the damage is already done. The tone has been set. It won't stop me from promoting accessibility and continuing to work on it in my job though.

@madebypaul Agreed and same.

@darrell73 @LFLegal

Lainey Feingold Feb 27, 2025

@darrell73 - I agree with Adrian‘s experience and your suspicions of how this might have happened. We had one structured negotiation case where the lawyer for the company kept talking about his blind grandfather. After a successful negotiation, I would always say we need the lawyers on the other side to have blind grandparents.

@aardrian

Lainey Feingold Feb 27, 2025

@darrell73 Darrell- breathing a sigh of relief that your job may be protected, is of course something you SHOULD be doing. All the best to you and Alison in navigating these challenging (to say the least) times.

@aardrian

@LFLegal @aardrian Yep. Thanks. We just attended a legislative advocacy session and rally to protect funding for children with developmental disabilities and I can definitely say that the focus is absolutely on how this is a nonpartisan issue affecting all families. Intersectionality was discouraged and was never brought up in our conversations with any of our state lawmakers.

Amanda Carson Feb 27, 2025

@LFLegal @darrell73 @aardrian Seconding.