[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Page 14234]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



               25TH ANNIVERSARY OF CHERRY VERSUS MATHEWS

   Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, July 19th was the 25th 
anniversary of the U.S. District Court decision known as Cherry v. 
Mathews, a historic ruling that helped open the door to full and equal 
citizenship for disabled citizens.
  Twenty five years ago, many disabled Americans could not use public 
transportation, go to schools and colleges, or even have access to 
parks, buildings, or voting booths. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was 
enacted to prohibit discrimination against an ``otherwise qualified 
handicapped individual'' in federally funded programs government-wide 
``solely by reason of his handicap.'' The statute included within its 
protections State and local governments, schools, universities, social 
service agencies, legal services offices, public housing, parks, and 
much more.
  While the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) argued 
that Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was merely a 
``policy statement'' that required no regulatory action, Dr. James L. 
Cherry of Georgia sought to assure legal rights and equality for 
disabled individuals. The lawsuit targeted Health and Human Services' 
Secretary David Mathews. His case was decided on July 19, 1976 when 
U.S. District Court Judge John Lewis Smith ordered HHS to develop the 
Section 504 regulation to prohibit discrimination against ``handicapped 
persons'' in any federally funded program.
  Dr. Cherry's case led to a regulation under section 504 of the 1973 
Rehabilitation Act that assures disabled citizens reasonable access to 
public programs and facilities. The case helped pave the way for the 
Americans with Disabilities Act, which expanded the protection from 
discrimination to all persons with disabilities.
  Section 504 was the first ``civil rights act'' for persons with 
disabilities. It was modeled after Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 
1964 which prohibited discrimination against persons in federally 
funded programs on the basis of race, religion, national origin, and 
creed. However, ``handicapped persons'' were not protected from 
discrimination by the 1964 law.
  Cherry v. Mathews was a landmark case that renewed our Nation's 
promise of equal opportunity for all Americans. As we observe the 25th 
anniversary of equal opportunity for disabled Americans, I urge us all 
to rededicate ourselves to this foundation of our Nation's 
greatness.

                          ____________________