Elwell v. Oklahoma, Ex Rel. Board of Regents

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that Title I of the ADA should govern over the less-specific Title II on the question of employment discrimination
• “Employing people isn’t a service, program, or activity the university provides” such that it would fall under the purview of Title II.
• “[W]e are always hesitant to assume Congress included pointless language in its statutory handiwork.”
• “Common sense, reflected in the canon expressio unius est exclusio alterius, suggests that the specification of [one -23- provision] implies the exclusion of others.” (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted)
• “[W]e are always hesitant to assume Congress included pointless language in its statutory handiwork.”
• the specification of one provision implies the exclusion of others

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).