Field v. Napolitano

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the ATSA precluded a TSA security screener from bringing suit under the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq.
• collecting other circuit decisions arriving at the same conclusion prior to the enactment of the WPEA
• “ATSA plainly precludes security screeners from bringing suit under certain of the federal employment statutes … including the Rehabilitation Act.”
• “The language of the ATSA makes clear that [airport security screener] has no cause of action under the Rehabilitation Act.”
• “Every circuit to address the issue has agreed that the language of the ATSA plainly 1 Castro v. Sec’y of Homeland Sec., 472 F.3d 1334, 1337 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam
• “‘[T]he use of . . . a “notwithstanding” clause clearly signals the drafter’s intention that the provisions of the “notwithstanding” section override conflicting provisions of any other 19 See id. § 16A-3-2(a)(1)(A

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).