RE: Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers
In her Administrative position, Hon. Chase T. Rogers has the responsibility and has the supervisory powers to ensure that the Judicial Branch is compliant fully with the ADA, and to immediately remedy ADA violations. Within a month of her appointment to be the Chief Justice of the CT Judicial Branch, Hon. Chase T. Rogers was made aware of ADA violations within the Branch. Justice Rogers was repeatedly made aware of ADA violations and non compliance. Instead of doing something about it, Hon. Rogers and her "GANG", founded the Public Service Trust Commission.
As a result of the work of the Commission, Appellate Court Justice, now Chief Appellate Court Justice Alexandra DiPentima and its focus groups determined that the Judicial Branch is in non compliance and has no non discriminating policy in regard to Title II of the ADA. Meanwhile, in regard to Title I of the ADA, under Judge Roger's leadership, the Branch implemented an employment non discrimination policy that she claims to be not a "paper commitment". So on every level, under Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, the CT Judicial Branch has done all it could do to avoid meeting its obligations under Title I and Title II of federal ADA law. Does this sound like someone who should be reappointed?
Judge Rogers, and to be completely fair each of her predecessor's, Sullivan and Peters, for instance, were required under the law to issue annual reports to the Governor and Legislators and CHRO on the efforts of the Judicial Branch to comply with Federal ADA law. There are no such reports--at least prior to 2013. That is a State Law. Also, it is State Law that all training for the ADA be operated either through or approved by CHRO. The CT Judicial Branch has not complied with that obligation. They have gone to outside venders and have no oversight or real review in regard to the training and/or quality of the individuals who are in place to inform the Branch of its obligations under the ADA.
One person they often call on to provide such training is Ms. Kathy Gips of the New England Training Center. When litigants from CT call the New England Training Center for help, they are frequently referred to Ms. Gips whose ties to insiders at the CT Judicial Branch has led her to downplay or fail to mention the rights of litigants under the ADA, so that such litigants who call the Training Center often end up not pushing for their rights under the ADA because the CT Judicial Branch has cleverly taken out of commission the resource they would ordinarily go to in order to be informed of those rights.
In addition, as you know, Judge Rogers hides behind various smoke screens and cover ups that you each have experienced and has tolerated the isolation between our children and ourselves that has arisen as a consequence of the violation of Title II of Federal ADA law, all the while boasting of her pride and joy in her relationships with her own children. Can any of you say "privileged"!!!!!!!
Judge Rogers "HOLDS" solid to the opinion that the ADA is not a defense in Court and that termination of parental rights is not a program, service, or activity as defined by the ADA and as such the Connecticut Courts and DCF are not obligated to comply with the ADA. Imagine, in one single fell swoop, Judge Chase T. Rogers has simply wiped out decades of federal ADA law--what a remarkable level of arrogance! For anyone who is interested, this issue arose during the Joseph Watley and Karin Hasemann case where the two were falsely accused of having mental illness that they do not have. This is a violation of Prong 3 of Title II of Federal ADA law.
In her capacity as Chief Justice, Chase T. Rogers had refused to take ADA arguments denied by the lower Courts including the Appellate Court which has repeatedly denied litigants their ADA rights. Further, she has held other misguided opinions, among other illegal opinions, that if a litigant did not ask for ADA protections back at the beginning of a case, they then lose the right to argue it in the present. See Logan v. Logan, See Martocchio v. Savior, and others.
Hon. Chase T. Rogers as Chief Justice has full Supervisory Authority, yet she cowers behind her Black Robe, because she may someday be holding Supreme Court authority over an "active case". What a convenient excuse for avoiding her legal obligation to address Disability Discrimination complaints, comments, requests, demands, and expectations.
Disability Discrimination is not supposed to be a part of or take place in any case; as such, disability discrimination complaints are not normally supposed to be in active litigation. Disability Discrimination from and in the Courts are supposed to be handled administratively for efficiency in time and expense and to reflect a ZERO TOLERANCE policy to enforce a remedy for past disability discrimination. It is there to eliminate current disability discrimination and prohibit future disability discrimination. It is supposed to weed and ween out all disability discrimination and should have NO EFFECT on Judge Rogers Rightful Obligations to "active Case Review" as Chief Justice of The State of Connecticut Judicial Branch.
I hope someone rises in opposition to address Hon. Chase T. Rogers reappointment. I will try hard to make it, let me know the date, and I suggest input to the Judiciary committee prior to the public hearing.
Yours For Barrier Free Courts With Sober And Honest Judges, and Justices including Chief Justice, With Non Discrimination Attorneys, Vendors and other State Contractors!
If you have been isolated and segregated from your Children or families because of Disability Discrimination; DEMAND they be returned and that you receive a full remedy in equity and law as proscribed in the ADA
Sincerely,
Bill Mulready
No comments:
Post a Comment