Judges, parts 1 & 2
You're going to want to see these.
Originally posted on my tiktok.
Part 1:
Part 2: (EVEN BETTER)
Enjoy. Let me know your thoughts, either here, or on footube.
P.D., Jay V. Shore
Discussion about this post
No posts
Originally posted on my tiktok.
Part 1:
Part 2: (EVEN BETTER)
Enjoy. Let me know your thoughts, either here, or on footube.
P.D., Jay V. Shore
No posts
Thank you for this deep-dive on ADA access. I want to add a lived example: my daughter (living in Florida) has PTSD and ADD and repeatedly sought ADA accommodations in a New Jersey family-court matter remote appearance, scheduled breaks, a notetaker, and access to transcripts/captioning. The court denied or severely restricted these accommodations, insisted on proceeding despite jurisdictional questions under the UCCJEA, and allowed testimony and procedures that she could not adequately confront while unaccommodated.
From a legal perspective, that raises multiple concerns:
• ADA Title II principles require state courts to provide reasonable modifications and effective communication when necessary for people with disabilities.
• Procedural due process requires adequate notice and a realistic opportunity to be heard; denying meaningful accommodations can strip litigants of that opportunity.
• Jurisdictional questions under the UCCJEA and related conflicts of law should have been resolved before moving forward; pressing a trial while jurisdiction is contested compounds the due-process problem.
This experience suggests more than individual error it looks systemic. Judges and court systems must be held to the constitutional and statutory obligations to provide access and neutrality. We need collective advocacy: appeals, complaints to oversight bodies, public exposure, and organizing so other affected families aren’t left alone. The people must insist our courts actually deliver justice not theater.