Independence of Representation in Court and Judicial Accountability in the United States: Have You Experienced Disability Discrimination in New York State Courts? I Would Like to Hear From You

THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Tuesday, November 3, 2026

Have You Experienced Disability Discrimination in New York State Courts? I Would Like to Hear From You

People with disabilities have the same right to use our courts as everyone else. But - having that right on paper and being able to exercise it in practice are not always the same thing.

I am investigating how New York State courts respond to people with disabilities who need special arrangements, known as reasonable ADA accommodations, to attend hearings, present their cases, or simply observe court proceedings.

I would like to hear from people who have experienced problems obtaining these accommodations from New York State court, as well as those whose requests were handled properly.

My goal is to find out whether the problems people encounter are isolated incidents or whether similar problems occur repeatedly in different courts across New York State and constitute repeated practices or set policies, written or unwritten.

What Kinds of Experiences Am I Looking For?

Here are some examples of situations I am interested in hearing from disabled litigants or court watchers:

The court ignored your request for help or accommodation. You explained that you had a disability and needed an accommodation, but the judge or court staff never answered, or answered only after it was too late, or answered inadequately, not providing to you the help you needed to use court facilities or court proceedings in an effective way to prosecute or defend your claim in court, or to watch a court proceeding.
The court refused to change the time of your hearing. Because of your disability, you could not attend court early in the morning, needed more time between hearings, or needed breaks during proceedings. The court refused to adjust its schedule.
You could not hear or understand what was happening in court. You requested hearing assistance, real-time transcription (a service that displays spoken words on a screen), or another form of communication assistance, but the court did not provide it.
You were unable to attend court in person. You needed to participate by video or telephone because of a disability, but the court refused or did not respond to your request.
The court demanded medical proof that you could not reasonably obtain. You were asked to provide medical records, letters from doctors, or other documents, but nobody clearly explained what was required or why the information you had already provided was insufficient, or you provided medical records, but they were ignored and accommodations were denied.
You did not know how to challenge a refusal. Your request for an accommodation was denied, but you were not told how to appeal that decision, whom to contact, or whether anyone could review it before your hearing, or the appellate process was too expensive or difficult for you, in any way, to undertake.
You were punished for being unable to participate without an accommodation. Your case was dismissed, you lost by default, you were fined or sanctioned, or you faced other negative consequences because you could not attend or effectively participate in a hearing without the help you had requested but that was not provided to you by the court system.
Your disability was not taken seriously. A judge, attorney, or court employee dismissed your limitations, made inappropriate comments about your disability, mocked you because of your disability, put your disability into question, or assumed that because you could write documents or perform certain activities, you were not disabled or did not need accommodations.
You were prevented from watching court proceedings. You are a member of the public, a journalist, or a court observer with a disability, and you encountered barriers when trying to attend or watch proceedings because of your disability or because you wanted to watch a proceeding where disability discrimination was part of the discussion.

These are only examples. If you experienced something different that you believe involved disability discrimination in a New York State court, I would like to hear about it.

Why Am I Investigating This?

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal law that protects people with disabilities from discrimination.

It applies to state courts.

In 2004, the United States Supreme Court decided Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, a case involving a paraplegic who was severely sanctioned - arrested and jailed - for refusing to crawl up the stairs of the courthouse or be carried to the 2nd floor courtroom by court personnel, in a courthouse without an elevator.

The Supreme Court recognized that access to the courts is a fundamental right and that Congress had the authority to protect that right through the ADA.

But disability discrimination is not limited to buildings without wheelchair ramps or elevators.

A person may be physically able to enter a courthouse and still be unable to participate meaningfully in a hearing.

For example, what happens when someone cannot hear the proceedings? When a person with a serious medical condition cannot attend an early morning hearing? When someone cannot prepare for several hearings scheduled on the same day because of disability-related limitations? When the disabled person needs extra time to prepare? When the disabled person is concerned about a speech impediment, a neurological condition, a set of menopause-related symptoms or a combination of such or other factors that may come across to the court as an intentional attitude towards the court, or a display of anger?

And what happens when the court refuses to make reasonable adjustments, then penalizes that person for being unable to participate?

These are questions worth investigating.

I Would Like to Hear Your Story

You do not have to be an attorney or know anything about disability law to contact me.

You do not have to know whether what happened to you was legally considered discrimination.

I am interested in what actually happened.

If possible, please tell me:

Which court you were dealing with and approximately when.
What disability-related difficulty you encountered.
What help or accommodation you requested.
How the judge or court staff responded.
What happened to your case or your ability to attend court as a result.

If you have letters, emails, court orders, or transcripts that help explain your experience, those may be useful as well.

I am interested in hearing from people who represented themselves, people who had attorneys, witnesses, family members, journalists, and members of the public.

I would also welcome information from attorneys, court employees, and disability advocates who have observed how these requests are handled.

And if your court provided the accommodations you needed, I would like to hear that, too. It is important to understand what works, not only what goes wrong.

What Will I Do With This Information?

I intend to compare the experiences people report, examine available court records, and look for problems that appear repeatedly.

For example, are people encountering the same difficulties in different counties? Are certain types of accommodations routinely refused? Are requests being decided according to clear rules? Do people have a practical way to challenge a denial before they lose the opportunity to participate in their hearings?

Where appropriate, I will also seek explanations from the courts and officials responsible for the practices being examined, including through FOIL requests.

Unless you allow or insist, I will not use your names in my reporting or any activities related to this investigation.

Please Share Your Experience

If you or someone you know has encountered disability-related difficulties in a New York State court, please contact me.

You may request that your identity not be published. I will discuss any privacy concerns with you before using identifying information in a report. Please do not post private medical records or sealed court documents in public comments.

The more firsthand accounts we can collect, the better we can understand whether New York State courts are providing people with disabilities the access to justice that the law promises them.

You do not need a law degree to recognize when you asked for help, did not receive it, and suffered consequences as a result.

And you should not need a law degree to tell your story.

Contact me by text at (843) 240-7745, by email to: tatiana.neroni@gmail.com, by messenger on Facebook, find me under my name.

This is an independent investigative journalism inquiry. It is not an offer of legal representation, and contacting me does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Independence of Representation in Court and Judicial Accountability in the United States