Steve wrote, as corrected:
"I believe the
suit was under Title [III] of the ADA, which dealt
with job-related accommodations, which quizbowl
wouldnt apply to. "
Perhaps Justice Scalia got it
wrong in his dissent, where he predicts that the
court's decision sets up a test that must be applied in
individual cases, even in non-professional
settings:
"One can envision the parents of a Little League
player with attention deficit disorder trying to
convince a judge that their son's disability makes it at
least 25 percent more difficult to hit a pitched ball.
(If they are successful, the only thing that could
prevent a court order giving the kid four strikes would
be a judicial determination that, in baseball, three
strikes are metaphysically necessary, which is quite
absurd.)"
<a href=http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/29may20011200/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/00pdf/00-24.pdf target=new>http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/29may20011200/www.supremecourtus.gov/opi
nions/00pdf/00-24.pdf</a> , page 13 of the dissent.
I hope that he
is indeed just being sarcastic and
alarmist.
Tom