Disabled passengers cruise for ADA rights on foreign ships.

Does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) apply to cruise ships sailing under foreign flags? The U.S. Supreme Court is considering the question in a case argued earlier this year.

The attorney for three plaintiffs who alleged that a cruise line failed to provide suitable accommodations for their disabilities argued that Congress's intent in enacting the ADA was to allow U.S. citizens with disabilities to fully participate in all aspects of life. The defendant cruise line argued that Congress did not expressly include ships owned by other nations and that forcing them to comply with the act could undermine existing international treaties and rights of sovereignty. (Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., No. 03-1338 (U.S. argued Feb. 28, 2005).)

More than 10 million people took cruises in 2004, including 9 million North Americans and 1.6 million international passengers, according to the Cruise Lines International Association. Many cruise ships operate from U.S. port cities but are registered in foreign countries to avoid paying U.S. taxes and complying with strict U.S. labor laws. Their ships still must obey U.S. environmental laws in American waters.

Thomas Spector, Julia Hollenbeck, and Rodger Peters brought suit against Norwegian Cruise Line (NCL), a subsidiary of Malaysia-based Star Cruises, for trips they booked in 1998 and 1999 out of Houston on the Norwegian Sea and Norwegian Star. The ships are registered in the Bahamas, although they operate principally in U.S. waters and out of U.S. ports.

The disabled passengers used wheelchairs and an electric scooter. They claim that NCL violated Title III of the ADA, which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations based on disability. They allege that the cruise line provided only a handful of accessible cabins, which were in less desirable interior locations and for which they were forced to pay a higher fare; that they could purchase a ticket only if they were traveling with a nondisabled companion; that they were barred from participating in evacuation and other safety drills; and that the ships' public restrooms, as well as other public spaces like restaurants, elevators, and pools, were not accessible to disabled passengers.

Two circuits have considered the issue. In Stevens v. Premier Cruises, the Eleventh Circuit--which encompasses Florida, the starting point for two-thirds of U.S. cruises--ruled in 2000 that foreign-flagged ships must comply with the ADA. (215 F.3d 1237 (11th Cir. 2000).) It reasoned that because nearly all cruise ships serving the United States are foreign-flagged, exempting foreign-flagged ships would create a broad exemption for almost the entire industry, undermining Congress's intent.

But the Fifth Circuit (which contains the ports of Houston and New Orleans), considering Spector last year, found that because Congress did not specifically include language about foreign vessels in the ADA, the act does not apply to them. (356 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 2004).)

Arguing before the Supreme Court in February, Thomas Goldstein of Washington, D.C., told the justices that foreign-flagged ships agree to provide a public accommodation by sailing in U.S. waters and selling tickets to its residents. "A necessary term of that is nondiscrimination," he said.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg responded, "You are saying, 'The United States rules the world.'" Goldstein agreed that applying the ADA to foreign-flagged ships "will have consequences abroad," but that does not mean that the United States would disregard other treaties or sovereignty issues.

The cruise line argued that historically Congress has clearly stated when a law is to apply to foreign ships.

If a "clear statement" by Congress covering foreign-flagged cruise ships was required in the ADA, said David Salmons of the U.S. Office of the Solicitor General, that would call into question enforcement of other laws against foreign vessels that don't specifically state their coverage, including Title II of the Civil Rights Act, which bars racial discrimination in public accommodations.

Gregory Garre, appearing as amicus curiae for the government of the Bahamas, argued that applying the ADA to foreign-flagged vessels "would invite precisely the sort of international discord, conflict, and confusion that Congress presumably seeks to avoid when it writes American laws." It would prompt other governments to impose different legal requirements to foreign-flagged ships, including U.S. ones, that use their ports.

"If a country like the United States extended its laws to foreign vessels that entered its ports, then other nations may well follow suit," he said.

At press time, the Court had not issued its opinion. If it rules for Spector, the case will be remanded to federal district court in Houston for trial.

According to NCL, one of the two ships involved has been decommissioned; the other will be taken out of service this summer.