{"content":[{"text":"unconstitutional. People qualifying for Medicaid are also at risk, because of the Trump \n Administration’s approval of Medicaid 1115 waivers. These waivers allow states to deny \n Medicaid to those who cannot frequently document compliance with new work requirements or \n pay premiums, calculated to result in hundreds of thousands losing Medicaid. Such waivers are \n being contested in court, and would be expected to rise to the Supreme Court.","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.088591,"width":0.750291,"height":0.08993400000000001}},{"text":"Rights of People with Disabilities: In a number of opinions, Judge Kavanaugh has sided with \n landlords, employers, and public institutions over people with disabilities. In Baloch v. \n Kempthorne, Kavanaugh denied a worker’s claims of disability discrimination and retaliation, \n despite a supervisor requiring doctor’s notes for each sick leave time request, giving low \n performance ratings, and engaging in multiple episodes of “profanity-laden yelling” after the \n worker filed a complaint. In Doe ex. Rel. Tarlow v. D.C., Judge Kavanaugh went against the \n policies of numerous states and courts that consider the wishes of individuals with intellectual \n disabilities, even if they were not legally competent, in deciding whether to perform elective \n surgery. The law in the District of Columbia required consultations with residents with \n disabilities, but in reality, officials had approved every surgery over the past 30 years, and did \n not even attempt to ask the individuals with disabilities what they wanted. While a lower court \n issued an injunction, Judge Kavanaugh vacated it on appeal, saying that considering such a \n patient’s wishes is not “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” He issued a dissent \n in Redman v. Graham, unwilling to allow claims of disability discrimination against a landlord’s \n attorney to proceed in court. These are troubling examples of Judge Kavanaugh’s inclination to \n rule against the vulnerable rather than defend protections for them.","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.193465,"width":0.758121,"height":0.281462}},{"text":"Further Stacking the Deck Against the Disadvantaged: Whether upholding a South Carolina \n voter ID law despite acknowledging that people of color were disproportionately likely to lack \n the form of identification required by the law, dissenting against a ruling in Agri Processor Co. v. \n NLRB that required an employer to bargain with a union (basing the dissent on the grounds that \n undocumented workers were allowed to vote in the election), or ruling against the \n constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Judge Kavanaugh stands against \n people who particularly need the protection of the law. Low-income people and communities of \n color make progress when the law ensures their right to vote, to bargain collectively, and to be \n protected against unscrupulous lenders who would trap them in a mountain of debt. Judge \n Kavanaugh’s decisions would reverse some of the progress that has been made.","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.489866,"width":0.76353,"height":0.177056}},{"text":"These are just some examples in a public record that would set the nation backward in our \n needed progress towards greater access to health care and rights basic to a democracy. It is based \n on this troubling record that we urge you to oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.681861,"width":0.760059,"height":0.055060999999999916}},{"text":"Signers:","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.752338,"width":0.06862700000000001,"height":0.02098500000000003}},{"text":"9to5, National Association of Working Women \n A World Fit For Kids! \n ACOSA \n Advocates for Responsible Care (ARxC )","bbox":{"left":0.117686,"top":0.784626,"width":0.372314,"height":0.11035899999999998}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}