Cruise Line Awareness
(An Educational Program Started in 1999 With On-Going Advocacy)

Copyright by Wheel Me On... 2000; 2005; 2009

All Photography Courtesy of Wheel Me On...

United States Supreme Court Rules on Spector et. al. VS Norwegian Cruise Lines

Goldstein & Howe, PC, Washington, DC ~ June 6th, 2005

The Supreme Court decided Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Lines today, reversing the Fifth Circuit's holding that Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act does not apply to foreign-flag cruise ships. The decision represents the third victory for the Stanford Law School's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic this Term. Earlier, the Court ruled that IRAs are exempt property of the estate (Rousey v. Jacoway, argued by Pam Karlan) and that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act recognizes disparate impact claims (Smith v. City of Jackson, which I argued along with Spector). Congratulations to the many Stanford students who worked on the case at the cert. and/or merits stages: William Adams, Eric Feigin, Nat Garrett, Daniel Goldman, Lauren Kofke, Jennifer Thomas, and Sean Tonolli.

Preliminarily, the Court holds without any substantial discussion that Title III of the ADA applies to cruise ships generally. Norwegian had contested that issue, but had placed its principal emphasis on the question whether the ADA applies to foreign-flag vessels.

The holding on that question that the ADA applies is effectively six to three. Justice Kennedy writes a majority opinion on that point joined by Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer. Justice Thomas, in a separate opinion, agrees that “those applications of Title III that do not pertain to internal affairs apply to foreign-flag vessels.” By contrast, Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion – joined in relevant part by the Chief Justice and Justice O’Connor – would flatly hold that “Title III does not apply to foreign-flag cruise ships.”

The issue then becomes: To what extent does the ADA apply? Here, the Court is further divided. The controlling opinion of three Justices – Kennedy for a plurality, joined by Stevens and Souter – holds that Title III applies except in all likelihood to the extent the statute would otherwise require “permanent,” “significant,” “structural” changes to the “basic ship design and construction.” That opinion is controlling because it is the narrowest holding: Justice Thomas would not apply the statute to require any structural changes and, as noted, the three Justices dissenting in full would not apply the statute at all. By contrast, two concurring Justices – Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justice Breyer – would hold that Title III applies except to the extent that the statute imposes requirements that conflict with treaty obligations.

So the decision is a significant, although not total, victory for persons with disabilities. Cruise lines that do not want to incur the costs of making their ships fully accessible can take comfort that they may not need to make the most significant, structural changes to their ships that the statute otherwise would require.

Court Expands Scope of Disabilities Law

Associated Press - June 6th, 2005

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court, expanding the scope of a landmark federal disabilities law, ruled Monday that foreign cruise lines sailing in U.S. waters must provide better access for passengers in wheelchairs.

The narrow 6-3 decision is a victory for disabled rights advocates, who said inadequate ship facilities inhibited their right to "participate fully in society."

"With this decision the Supreme Court has told the cruise lines that we are entitled to what every other passenger receives -- access to emergency equipment and the full range of public facilities," said Douglas Spector of Houston, one of the disabled passengers suing the cruise lines.

A spokeswoman for the International Council of Cruise Lines, based in Arlington, Va., said the group was reviewing the decision and had no immediate comment. The ruling has wide implications for the cruise industry, which fears that remodeling to comply with the disabilities law could cost millions.

Congress intended the 1990 American with Disabilities Act to apply to cruise lines, justices said.

"The statute is applicable to foreign ships in the United States waters to the same extent that it is applicable to American ships in those waters," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. He was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

Still, the ruling is unclear how much the $2.5 billion foreign cruise industry, which carries 7.1 million passengers each year, will actually have to reconfigure pools, restaurants and emergency equipment for wheelchair accessibility, an upgrade that could cost the industry millions.

Kennedy noted that cruise lines need not comply with Title III of the ADA to the extent it creates too much international discord or disruption of a ship's internal affairs, under a provision of the statute that calls only for "readily achievable" modifications.

"It is likely that under a proper interpretation of 'readily achievable' Title III would impose no requirements that interfere with the internal affairs of foreign-flag cruise ships," Kennedy wrote, in sending the case back to lower court to determine what is ultimately required of cruise lines.

Justice Clarence Thomas provided the sixth vote holding that the ADA applies. But he joined the dissenters in saying the actual modifications required under the federal law did not extend to changes to a ship's "physical structure."

Three disabled passengers, who boarded Norwegian Cruise Line in Houston in 1998 and 1999, say they paid premiums for handicapped-accessible cabins and the assistance of crew but the cruise line failed to configure restaurants, elevators and other facilities in violation of the ADA.

Norwegian Cruise Line countered that only an explicit statement of Congress can justify imposing the U.S. law on a ship that sails under a foreign flag, even if it is docked at a U.S. port. The federal law is silent as to whether foreign cruise lines are covered by the ADA.

In a dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia argued that extending the federal law to foreign ships will create international discord and is wrong because Congress does not explicitly call for it. The ruling should leave no opening for ships to be required to change their amenities to fit the laws of each country they visit, he said in a dissent joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Much of the industry registers its ships away from home countries in places such as the Bahamas, Liberia, Honduras, Panama and Cyprus, which promote the practice by pointing to their business-friendly regulatory outlooks. The U.S. cruise industry is almost exclusively foreign-flagged.

The case was an appeal from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in New Orleans, which ruled in January that foreign-flag cruise ships are not covered by the ADA. Under the Supreme Court's decision, the disabled passengers who filed suit may now proceed to trial to prove discrimination.

The case is Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line, 03-1388.

Norweigan Sea Cruise Vessel
Norwegian Sea, Port of Houston, Texas
September 5, 1999
Vessel no longer sailing in USA Ports of Call

Cruise Line Awareness at the United States Supreme Court

© March 9, 2005

Wheel Me On... established a "Cruise Line Awareness" program after members had gone on a Norwegian Cruise Line (NCL) foreign flag vessel and experienced discrimination because they were individuals who used wheelchairs and traveled with companions who were subject to discrimination by association, after seeking legal advice. In July 2000, five members of Wheel Me On filed suit against Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., because of the discrimination inflicted on them during embarkation in Houston, Texas, during the voyage, and disembarking in Houston, Texas. The NCL cruises from Houston, Texas, which were supposed to be enjoyable "Texaribbean" 7-day cruises, were anything but enjoyable for persons with mobility impairments and their traveling companions.

After years of appeals, on February 28, 2005, Petitioners, members of their legal team, and members and supporters of Wheel Me On gathered together in front of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. to enter the hearing for Case No. 03-1388, Spector et. al. vs. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., before eight Justices in the highest court of our nation. No case before the United States Supreme Court is an "ordinary" case, and climbing the ladder to reach a final decision on "whether and to what extent Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act shall apply to foreign cruise vessels using United States ports of call", was an achievement in itself. Ultimately, the courtroom was packed.

However, one of the major issues within news media is interpretation of foreign cruise vessels using American ports, making the case appear as if vessels are just passing through. Not true! In this case, these are ships docked in various ports in major cities in various U.S. American states, offering round-trip cruises to and from the same port, but refusing to comply with non-discrimination because they are waving a foreign flag.

In front of the prestigious United States of America Supreme Court building, Petitioner Julia Hollenbeck, Founder and President of Wheel Me On, and Petitioner David Thomas Killough, an expert on environmental safety and hazards with AARC Environmental, and Wheel Me On Board of Director are surrounded by Wheel Me On advocates and members and part of their legal team.

Left to right: James Weisman, American Association of People with Disabilities, (AAPD) and Board Chair and General Counsel for United Spinal Association; Cleo King from United Spinal Association; Andrew Imparato, President, AAPD; David Musgraves, Executive Vice-President, Wheel Me On; Thomas Goldstein, Attorney at Law; Nat Garrett, Eric Feigin, and Lauren Kofke all with the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Clinic. (Photo on right)

Moments before entering the United States of America Supreme Court Building, Petitioners gathered for a group photo before entering the United States Supreme Court. Petitioner Douglas Spector and Julia Hollenbeck are surrounded by the Spector's daughter; Anna Spector, Petitioner, wife of Douglas Spector; the Spector's son; John Wodatch, Attorney at Law, head of the Disability Rights Section in the Civil Rights Division at the US Department of Justice; Andrew Imparato, President, AAPD; and David Thomas Killough, Petitioner, Board of Director-Safety, WMO. Roger Peters, the fifth Petitioner, and member of WMO passed away in July 2004. (Photo on left)

Despite a rather cold morning with snow starting to fall, large crowds of people began filing into the United States Supreme Court building to hear arguments on behalf of persons with mobility impairments and their non-disabled traveling companions in favor of applying the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to foreign flagged vessels that sail in and out of American ports. Attorney Thomas Goldstein remained poised while answering rapid-fire questions for twenty-minutes concerning the Petitioners' position, then David Salmons, Attorney at Law and representative from the United States Solicitor General's office spoke for ten minutes to voice the United States' support of Petitioners' position that the ADA applies to foreign flagged vessels that sail to and from American ports. Questions were then fired at attorneys representing Norwegian Cruise Lines and the Bahamas for thirty-minutes, but the session ended with Attorney Thomas Goldstein presenting an exhilarating closing statement in support of the Petitioners.

The hour-long session ended, and reports about the case immediately hit the airwaves and newspapers. No one really had the story correct in total, but it obviously received a lot of attention. The United States Supreme Court Justices are "expected" to make a decision soon, but news reports state the out-come may not be known until the end of June. In the meantime, millions of Americans are waiting to learn, ("Will justice prevail for persons with disabilities, and their companions, to have the right of freedom and fully enjoy cruises from the United States of America ports without discrimination"), the answer by the highest court of our nation.

Case No. 03-1388, Spector et. al vs. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.

Heard on February 28th, 2005
By the United States Supreme Court in Washington DC

We sincerely thank the following organizations for the Brief of Amici Curiae in support of the five petitioners, all Members of Wheel Me On...

Paralyzed Veterans of America
American Association of People with Disabilities
The Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc.
Epilepsy Foundation
United Spinal Association
United Cerebral Palsy
The Arc of the United States
American Council of the Blind
National Multiple Sclerosis Society
The Training and Advocacy Support Center of the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems, Inc.

And, sincerely thank all other individuals or States providing Amici Curiae in support of the Plaintiffs...

Fellowship Gathering on February 26th, 2005
Hamilton Crowne Plaza, Host Hotel in Washington, the District of Columbia

Nearly five years ago when the Spectors, Julia Hollenbeck, David Killough, and Roger Peters recounted what had happened to them when they tried to take peaceful vacations aboard NCL vessels sailing from Houston, it was immediately clear they had suffered the exact type of disability discrimination that the ADA sought to prohibit. "Because cruise lines offer so many types of places of public accommodations in one location, the case offered a unique opportunity to address disability discrimination in places of lodging, restaurants, theaters, fitness centers, medical offices, and public transportation facilities at one time", said Elaine Roberts, Attorney at Law, who initiated suit on behalf of Spector, et. al., when NCL would not agree to change its discriminatory policies.

Attorney at law, Elaine Roberts stated, "It takes a special type of person to endure the hardships of five years of litigation brought on by a multi-billion dollar company like NCL. We knew we had the type of brave, tenacious an intelligent people who would stick it out against whatever NCL threw at them over the years. NCL has spared no expense and effort to try to discourage these plaintiffs from proceeding with this suit to change NCL's discriminatory policies. When NCL would not change its discriminatory policies against persons with mobility impairments, even though it had previously been sued by the United States government, for identical discriminatory policies against persons with visual impairments, NCL would not even apologize for its improper treatment of the Spectors, et. al. and their family members, it became obvious that we would have to take it all the way to the United States Supreme Court to get NCL's discriminatory policies to stop."

"Although the journey to the United States Supreme Court has been long, tedious, and very difficult for the Plaintiffs and their counsel, the fact that we continue to receive calls from persons with mobility impairments about identical discriminatory treatment aboard NCL vessels (including NCL's American flagged vessels), convinces us that we must continue this fight against NCL. It is time that the provisions of Title III of the ADA, passed in 1990, are followed in this country. Companies have had 15-years to come into compliance with the ADA for their places of public accommodation and many have voluntarily done this. Unfortunately, NCL is not one of those companies and the discrimination prohibited by the ADA must stop now so that no one ever has to face the indignities that Spector, et al endured". She said.

People not attending the fellowship gathering on February 26th, missed the opportunity to meet the team who brought everything together, with supporters who worked very closely with Plaintiffs/Petitioners, two Houston law firms, and a dedicated law firm in Washington, DC, to bring awareness, advocacy, and alliance, to stop discrimination.



(1) Andrew Imparato, President, American Association of People with Disabilities, (AAPD) is deep in conversation with Thomas C. Goldstein, Attorney at Law, Goldstein & Howe, P.C., representing the Petitioners on February 28th at the United States Supreme Court in Washington, DC, while David Musgraves, Executive Vice-President, Wheel Me On, listens intently. AAPD was one of several organizations that provided Amicus Briefs in support of the Petitioners. (2) Nat Garrett with the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Clinic visits with a colleague, while another individual speaks with someone across the table. (3) The camera gets the attention of Petitioner Anna Spector; the Spector's son; Douglas Spector, the lead Petitioner; the Spector's daughter; and Lauren Kolke and Eric Feigin, both with the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Clinic.

(1) The lead Petitioner, Douglas Spector smiles shyly from the opposite end of the table while Eric Feigin turns to speak to someone behind him. (2) Julia Hollenbeck, Petitioner, Founder and President of Wheel Me On, beams as David George, Attorney at Law, Edwards & George, LLP, Houston, Texas, and Thomas Goldstein, Attorney at Law, Goldstein and Howe Law Firm, Washington, DC, stand next to her.



The evening marked a fellowship gathering to bring together fellowship of the many individuals who worked diligently for the benefit of millions of Americans with disabilities who look forward to vacations on cruise vessels sailing out of American Ports. Missing from the photos, were Elaine Roberts, Attorney at Law; Petitioner David Thomas Killough, Board Director, Wheel Me On; and Petitioner Roger Peters, Member, Wheel Me On, who passed away a few months ago. (David Killough, Petitioner, arrived the following day to attend the hearing at the United States Supreme Court.)

There is little doubt our 32nd President of the United States of America was strongly against discrimination in any shape or form and freedom on major issues were always uppermost in his mind for the safety and well-being of every American. Visit the link on our web site to read several of his famous quotes, too many Americans have seemingly forgot, and his determination to make things right during the twelve years he served our country.

It Began in the State of Texas

Hearing on Motion for Class Certification

Some of the WMO DirectorsOn November 19th, 2001, Julia Hollenbeck arrived in Houston, Texas to attend a hearing that ultimately joined an on-going program for Wheel Me On..."Accessibility Awareness on Cruise Vessels".

She was joined by Greg Joyce, Director of Operations, Houston, TX; David Killough, Director of Environmental Hazards, WMO, Houston, TX; Rodger Peters; Donna Statham, (Ms. Wheelchair Texas 2000), Liaison for WMO, St. Hedwig, TX; Elia Gonzales, Director of Operations, WMO, San Antonio, Texas; and William S. Dillow, Vice-President, WMO, Bulverde, Texas. Additional wheelers from Houston also attended.

Julia Hollenbeck, President of Wheel Me On, Douglas Spector, and Rodger Peters, filed a class action lawsuit in Harris County, Texas, on behalf of persons who utilize wheel chairs or scooters for mobility and who were denied access to portions of Norwegian Cruise Line vessels, NCL ports of calls, and NCL day excursions.

In this disability discrimination suit, the class action plaintiffs complain about NCL’s policies of relegating passengers with mobility impairments to inferior, interior rooms, requiring them to travel with persons who are not mobility impaired, and denying them access to NCL day excursions and ports of call.

The class action lawsuit also alleges that NCL vessels have inaccessible public restrooms, restaurants, swimming pools, decks, evacuation areas, and elevators. Additionally, there are only four accessible rooms aboard ships with over 800 rooms, and individuals who require accessible cabins are not allowed to take advantage of cruise discount packages.

The attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the class action, included Elaine Roberts and Brady Edwards. During the hearing, it was learned that between 4000-4500 disabled passengers traveled on NCL cruises each year. After months of research, discovery, and depositions, the lawyers and the five named plaintiffs moved for class certification on behalf of the thousands of disabled NCL passengers.

David T. Killough and Julia Hollenbeck Donna with Elia Gonzales

Arriving at the court house with ample time to visit and relax, Julia Hollenbeck and David Killough enjoyed visiting with "Spoke" the mascot, while Donna Statham kicked back and visited with Elia Gonzales.

At 9:00 a.m. on November 19, 2001, Brent Gamble, Judge of the 270th Judicial District Court, Civil Courts Building at 301 Fannin Street in Houston, Texas conducted a class certification hearing to determine whether the disability discrimination lawsuit against NCL would be allowed to proceed as a class action. It is very important that NCL and the Court realize the strong public interest in this class action and in changing NCL policies toward persons with disabilities.

Rodger Peters and Donna Statham Asked for his input following the hearing, William Dillow submitted his input by saying, "It amazed me to hear both sides argue the merits of the case, and appear to be exactly opposite. The statements by the lawyers were true, but only in a context that was not actually the case in question. It amazes me that they can get opposite viewpoints without actually lying. The crux of the matter is whether or not people in wheelchairs are being discriminated against on the cruise. The legal people on the defendant's side are using every chance to obfuscate the facts. They throw in many "ipso facto's" and other legal arguments. They argue that four staterooms on the fourth inside deck are adequate on a ship with 800 staterooms. They also argued that since a high percentage of people in wheel chairs are in the lower socioeconomic group, there would not be a need for "posh" staterooms. Of course, this is ridiculous. In actual fact, it is not actually much more expensive to construct a barrier free room as opposed to a standard room. Most of the actual case will hinge on whether "reasonable accommodations" were attempted by the cruise line."

He went on to say, "The hope of the litigants is that in the future, it will be more enjoyable for people in wheel chairs to cruise the seas. They also hope that more people will be able to take part in a really enjoyable vacation at a very reasonable price. I think that a cruise is one of the most cost effective vacations you can buy. Also, in this hi-tech world, more people will be able to use some of the mobility aids that are being developed and will be able to take a cruise/vacation. Win, loose, or draw, on this case, with the help of the courts, and the "ADA" the future looks bright indeed for "Wheelers".

Greg Joyce and Donna Statham The hearing before Judge Brent Gamble, allowed me to hear from both sides on the accessibility of Norwegian Cruise Lines. I am a frequent traveler and would have done what any disabled traveler would do. I would ask the questions regarding accessibility and also rely on their information and brochures to assure me everything I could possibly want or need would be available and accessible. Otherwise, I would not be interested in going on a cruise. I found that through testimony (opening remarks) that I would tend to believe or side with the Plaintiff. I feel (based on the information orally presented) that NCL misrepresented themselves and it sounded like they would really rather have this heard individually rather than as a class action. I think they "fear" the outcome. It would be easier to settle and go on doing business as usual (denying reasonable accommodation of the disabled). Elaine Roberts and David George are well-armed to represent this suit and I believe their final actions will bear action resulting in "full use and enjoyment" - "equal access to all" - and a "reasonable accommodation" to the general disabled traveler. Naturally, time will eventually reveal all, and I have no inside information but my hunch is that NCL will not prevail in this case. It may take years to finally resolve, but you have to start somewhere.
Greg Joyce, Director of Operations
Wheel Me On... Houston, Texas

A Status Report from the Department of Justice
September 2002

Texas Federal Court Finds Cruise Ships Covered by Title III - The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas agreed with an amicus brief filed by the Department and ruled that cruise ships are covered by title III. In Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Limited plaintiffs alleged that Norwegian's cruise ships violate title III by failing to provide an adequate number of accessible cabins and by charging extra for them, and by providing programs and services in inaccessible areas of the ships. The court held that cruise ships are both "public accommodations" and "specified public transportation" covered by title III, and that application of title III to foreign-flagged cruise ships does not conflict with international treaties or violate the presumption against extraterritorial application of federal law. The court, however, disagreed with the Department that the cruise line was under an obligation to engage in readily achievable barrier removal. Instead, it dismissed the barrier removal claims because it believed that the absence of requirements for cruise ships in the ADA Standards for Accessible Design leaves cruise lines without adequate notice of what is expected of them and courts without sufficient guidance to make consistent decisions as to what readily achievable barrier removal requires. The court, however, did not dismiss plaintiff's claims regarding the alleged surcharges for accessible rooms and the failure to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures.

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
September 4th, 2003 Hearing

I attended oral arguments at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, Louisiana on September 4, 2003, for appeal number 02-21154, (Douglas Spector, et al. vs. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd.). I listened to the arguments presented by both sides, and I found them to be interesting.

Having awareness for the difficulties people encounter having physical difficulties from my mom's situation, and Wheel Me On members, I was proud to be part of this historical event.

The Court of John Minor Wisdom was open to the public with the panel of three Fifth Circuit Judges presiding over the case to hear oral arguments on three primary issues:
  1. Whether the ADA applies to foreign flagged passenger vessels while in United States ports of call.

  2. Whether vessels are required to remove architectural barriers.

  3. Whether individuals who are not disabled themselves, but who travel with persons with mobility impairments, should be allowed to assert associational claims against cruise ships for differential treatment encountered during their travels with persons with disabilities.
I was surprised to hear, "Considering taking the case to the Supreme Court", during arguments from Norwegian Cruise Line's attorney. Now going into its third year in litigation, hopefully, a decision in this case will bring closure soon and favorable outcome for all disabled Americans. The Fifth Circuit decision will surely have a large impact on foreign flagged vessel accessibility regardless of the Court's final decision.

For those who could not make the journey to New Orleans...
Task Force Director, WMO

Message From Member Regarding 5th Circuit Court Decision

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not apply to foreign cruise ships, even when those ships are in U.S. waters. Plaintiffs asserted that the ship contained physical barriers that denied them access to public accommodations and other facilities on the ships. The court held that there was nothing in the ADA indicating that Congress intended for the ADA to be applied extra-territorially. This decision is directly contrary to the 11th Circuit decision in Stevens v. Premier Cruises and sets the stage for a possible Supreme Court review. (Member, Georgia)

January 12, 2004 ~ Fifth Circuit Court ~ No. 02-21154

The Plaintiff's attorneys applied for rehearing on banc on Friday, January 23rd, 2004, to learn if the entire Fifth Circuit would review the decision of the three judge panel that made this ruling. If it is granted, the case would go before all the Judges of the Fifth Circuit. If it is denied, the Plaintiff's attorneys planned to file a petition for the Supreme court of the United States to review the issue and decide if the 11th Circuit, which ruled the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA), does apply to cruise ships that sail into American waters is correct or whether the 5th Circuit decision should apply.

Disability Rights organizations were asked to address this important issue and urged to write an amicus brief in support of applying the ADA to foreign flag vessels that sail in the United States of America waters. Although this is a minor set-back, it was strongly believed the ADA will ultimately be applied to foreign flagged vessels that sail into American waters with the help of amicus briefs because with sufficient amicus briefs for the attorneys to have on file, the more likely it was that the Supreme Court would accept the case.

Adobe Acrobat Reader Will Be Needed To Read The Following Interesting PDF Files
(Download a copy of Acrobat Reader by Clicking Here)

Twenty-Eight Reasons Why Amicus Briefs Supported the Petitioners

Petition for Writ of Certiorari Filed!

On April 1, 2004, a petition for writ of certiorari was filed with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of passengers with mobility impairments who utilize wheel chairs or scooters for mobility and their traveling companions. This petition sought to have the United States Supreme Court accept the appeal to determine whether the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) applies to foreign flag vessels that sail into American ports. As previously noted on this website, a recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal's decision held that the ADA does not apply to foreign flag vessels even if these vessels sail in American waters and into American ports. This ruling was directly contrary to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the Stevens case which held that the ADA could be applied to foreign flag vessels which sail into American ports.

Obviously the issue of whether the ADA applies to vessels is an important one for all persons with persons with disabilities but the Supreme Court does not accept every request for an appeal that is presented to it. Therefore, disability rights organizations were urged to file an amicus brief to request that the Supreme Court consider this important issue on appeal. The Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) had already advised counsel for the Spector plaintiffs that their organization would be filing an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to accept this important issue on appeal.

Norwegian Cruise Line will be filing their brief on or about June 1, 2004. It was not known when the Supreme Court would rule on whether they would consider this important issue on appeal.

NCL's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code ("Chapter 121") prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities, and requires that persons with disabilities have full and equal access to all public facilities, including boats. In many ways, Chapter 121 is similar to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). However, Chapter 121 also provides for monetary damages and/or criminal penalties when discrimination against persons with disabilities is proven in court.

In the state court action against Norwegian Cruise Line (NCL), the Plaintiffs alleged that NCL discriminated against persons who utilize wheelchairs or scooters for mobility by: (1) denying them full use and enjoyment of all facilities and services onboard their boats; (2) failing to make reasonable accommodations without charge; and (3) maintaining unfair pricing policies and sailing requirements for persons with disabilities. NCL contended that Texas did not have authority to pass a law that would impact foreign flagged vessels and asked the judge to immediately dismiss all Chapter 121 claims against NCL. After reviewing briefs submitted by NCL and the Plaintiffs, and listening to oral arguments from both sides, Judge Brent Gamble in the 270th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas denied NCL's Motion for Summary Judgment today.

Therefore, the Plaintiffs will be allowed to proceed with their disability discrimination claims against NCL under Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code. Since there is very little case law interpreting the protections provided by Chapter 121, the Plaintiffs in the state court case against NCL should be congratulated for their success today and their efforts to protect the rights of persons with disabilities in Texas. (08/27/04)

Sept. 28, 2004, 10:45AM
(From the) Associated Press

COURT AGREES TO HEAR CRUISE SHIP ACCESS CASE


WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court today agreed to consider whether foreign cruise lines sailing in U.S. waters must comply with a federal disabilities law requiring better access to passengers in wheelchairs.

The case seeks to determine what Congress intended when it passed the landmark American Disabilities Act in 1990 barring discrimination against the disabled in the enjoyment of services in places of "public accommodation."

Disabled groups, who boarded a Norwegian Cruise Line in Houston in 1998, say they weren't given adequate access to ship pools, restaurants and emergency equipment. In other situations, they alleged they were forced to pay additional fees for wheelchair accessible rooms, inhibiting their rights to "participate fully in society."

Norwegian Cruise Line counters that only an express statement of Congress can justify imposing the U.S. law on a ship that sails under a foreign flag, even if it is docked at a U.S. port. The federal law is silent as to whether foreign cruise lines are covered by the ADA.

"This well-established principle of maritime and international law prevents unintended clashes between port states and flag states over the governance of oceangoing ships," Norwegian's filing states.

The case has wide implications for the cruise industry, which could be forced to spend millions of dollars to remodel ships. The International Council of Cruise Lines filed a friend of the court brief in support of Norwegian Cruise Line, while several advocacy groups joined in a brief for the disabled plaintiffs.

"Making cruise ships fully accessible to people with disabilities makes good business sense," the brief from Paralyzed Veterans of America and other groups stated, citing an expected surge in the disabled population due to aging baby boomers.

The case is an appeal from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in New Orleans, which ruled in January that foreign-flag cruise ships are not covered by the ADA.

Both the cruise lines and disability groups then urged the Supreme Court to take the case, noting a conflict with an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 2000 saying foreign ships must comply with the law. In that lawsuit, a Florida resident said she had to pay additional fees for a room with disabled access.

After the 11th Circuit decision, several cruise lines settled lawsuits claiming ADA violations, and a federal judge in Miami ordered a Casino Princesa Ship in 2001 to make restrooms more wheelchair-accessible.

The case is Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line, 03-1388.

Note:
The above article is posted on the Internet at http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/2819375, however there is much more to this story. The fact was there were a number of web sites showing Norwegian Cruise Lines ALREADY flying the American flag on the aft of at least two of their ships in American waters. Does this NOT also bring them under direct need to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Code of Federal Regulations from the United States Department of Justice? Furthermore, the NCL Corporate office is located in the State of Florida, in the United States of America. When reading the Norwegian web sites, (during this time), there was no mention of accommodations for people with disabilities, and yet, cruise vessel staterooms, cabins, and suites, were treated and referred to as HOTEL ROOMS once on board their vessel.

There is a lot more about this case then just accommodations, but the need now is for the support of other organizations concerned about Americans with Disabilities being wrongfully treated, discriminated against, overlooked, or rejected. In all due respect, it is important for our American ports to welcome "foreign flagged" cruise ships, but in the same respect, in entering our waters seeking American passengers and American dollars, compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act is in order for ALL Americans to enjoy the voyage necessary. Now that the United States Supreme Court in Washington DC had agreed to hear this case, the above Amicus Briefs helped prove need for compliance of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Members of Wheel Me On... Sincerely thank each and every individual or organization coming forward.

270th District Court, Houston, Texas
Trial Reset!

Roger Peters w/Ms. Wheelchair Texas 2000After attending hearings, waiting for decisions, and yearning for closure, their day in court had been set for Trial by Jury, with the Honorable Judge Brent Gamble, after years of waiting. The case, No. 2000-39257; Spector, et al. v. NCL; was scheduled to be heard by jury in the 270th District Court of Harris County, Houston, Texas, on April 18th, 2005, with the possibility of change for date or time to be announced.

Sadly, the Trial by Jury would be held without one of the plaintiffs, because Roger Peters passed away in July 2004. Roger was a member of Wheel Me On, an interesting, very social able person, who loved life and cruising on the open sea. He will be missed by family, friends, and members of this organization, and fondly remembered mostly for his appearance during the first hearing of this lawsuit that included several members and people affiliated with Wheel Me On.

The laughter and spirit of Roger Peters when having his photo taken with Ms. Wheelchair Texas 2000 brought such joy to all of us, and his continued interest in the organization, a lasting memory of support. We must move forward, the same as what Roger Peters would have done, as strong individuals seeking justice to stop abuse against people with disabilities. Roger will be missed by all of us when our day in court arrives, but we will have him in our hearts and minds.

ORDER RESETTING TRIAL

Spector, Douglas, et. al. VS Norwegian Cruise Line Limited

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, 270TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

This case was reset for TRIAL for the two week period beginning 09-05-2005. If the case had not been reached by the second Friday after this date, the trial would be reset. All previous pre-trial deadlines remained in effect, unless changed by the court.

The Order Signed: February 08, 2005 by the Honorable Brent Gamble, Judge, 270th District Court

Houston, Texas - Plaintiffs Case Dismissed!

Aftermath of the United States Supreme Court ADA Victory for Plaintiffs
Cause No. 2000-39257 ~ Houston, Texas

In July 2005, Norwegian Cruise Lines filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with the 270th Texas District Court in Houston, Texas. The living Plaintiffs legal counsel filed a Notice of Nonsuit Without Prejudice of Defendants on August 3rd, 2005, and on August 16th, 2005 the 270th Texas District Court ORDERED Defendant Norwegian Cruise Line's Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED, and the Plaintiffs' claims against Norwegian Cruise Lines DISMISSED.

The Plaintiffs met with legal counsel on August 25th, 2005 in Houston, Texas and discussed the pending Federal Court appearance.

This was the second visit within six months for the living Plaintiffs to come together as members of Wheel Me On, and enjoy the camaraderie they shared following the meeting, with lunch together before departing. The Plaintiffs' included Doug Spector, Ana Spector, Julia Hollenbeck, and David Killough. For the betterment of all Americans, the members of Wheel Me On agreed to move forward, placing the past behind by taking a positive step into the future.

Interested in Following or Joining the Cruise Line Awareness Program? Contact Wheel Me On...

Google
 
Web www.wheelmeon.org


Note: Wheel Me On... does not warrant Google Sponsor ads will be in ADA compliance or support web page content.

Back to Top