Intangible Inaccessibility: How Wayfair Paves The Way For An Expanded ADA

Volume 93, Online

By Cassidy C. Duckett [PDF]

This Comment analyzes the circuit split regarding the ADA’s applicability to emerging technologies and proposes that the Supreme Court use similar reasoning to its decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. to the extended ADA to intangible places of public accommodation. Section II discusses the circuit split, as well as the role of emerging technologies in modern life and the Court’s decision in Wayfair. Section III demonstrates why the Court should apply the Wayfair Court’s framing of physicality to extend the ADA’s definition of “public accommodations.”

Tags: spotlight

By Fiona Burke, Temple Law Review Volume 96 Staff Editor Liberals have, as exit polls and Bernie Sanders point out, largely lost the working class and, in fact, most of America. There are many reasons for this, all of which have been dissected and analyzed ad nauseum in the past few weeks and likely will be for even years. One such […]

Author: Jasnoor Hundal In early August 2023, the Supreme Court stayed the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision, In re Purdue Pharma L.P., and granted certiorari to hear oral argument in December of 2023. The parties were asked to brief and argue “[w]hether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a […]

Randy Kominsky is a member of Temple Law’s Class of 1979. Mr. Kominsky was a staff editor for Volume 51 and an associate research editor for Volume 52 of Temple Law Review. His case note, Housing Discrimination – The Appropriate Evidentiary Standard for Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, was published in 1978.[1] After graduating, he moved […]