Research Partners Capture Equality in History Award

Huntington juniors Sage Cicciari and Amani Hug joined together to form a sensational research team for this year’s National History Day contest. The teenager’s created a documentary on the groundbreaking US Supreme Court decision in Olmstead v. LC. The research partners captured the Outstanding Entry on Equality in History Award.

Ms. Cicciari and Ms. Hug are intellectual powerhouses, respected by classmates and faculty members throughout Huntington High School. The duo participates in the after school club and athletics programs and is very well liked.

“We chose the Olmstead v. L.C. Supreme Court case for our documentary because it is a significant case that addresses the rights of individuals with disabilities and their right to live in the least restrictive environment,” Ms. Cicciari said. “We felt that this case was a perfect fit for the theme of ‘Rights and Responsibilities’ as it highlights both the civil rights of people with disabilities and the responsibilities of the government in providing necessary support. For our research, we looked at the case details, legal documents, articles and personal stories of the individuals to gather the most accurate details. Then, we organized everything into a documentary format, including lots of quotes and images.”

The “Olmstead vs. LC Case: Defining Disability Rights and the Responsibility of Care” documentary impressed the contest judges, who included Huntington faculty members. Chairman of Humanities Joseph Leavy made the formal presentation of the award during a ceremony in the School Heritage Museum.

“Sage and I knew we wanted to find a topic that people might not have known about,” Ms. Huq said. “We spent time researching and the Olmstead v. LC case drew our attention as it was a recent case with not much coverage. We believed it fit the contest theme of ‘Rights and Responsibilities’ as the case resulted in justice for disabled individuals. We first started the research by learning about the plaintiff’s background and the indirect abuse they suffered through. We used primary sources  to learn about the timeline and case itself. We also wanted to research the past century to see continuity of the ongoing denial of given human rights. We centered our case around the law and the steps taken now to integrate disabled individuals in our community. We then gathered pictures we saw fit to represent our research.”

Like her research partner, Ms. Huq is very involved around the high school. She’s a member of the cross country, winter track and golf teams as well as being a chemistry lab assistant and a member of the Science Olympiad team, Key Club, Grandfriends club and Habitat for Humanity. She’s been inducted into the Math, Science, English and Spanish Honor Societies to date.

“The story of the Olmstead case begins with two women, Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson, who had mental illness and developmental disabilities, and were voluntarily admitted to the psychiatric unit in the state-run Georgia Regional Hospital,” according to the US Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division’s archive.ADA.gov website. “Following the women's medical treatment there, mental health professionals stated that each was ready to move to a community-based program. However, the women remained confined in the institution, each for several years after the initial treatment was concluded. They filed suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for release from the hospital.”

The two Huntington juniors spent countless hours researching, writing, editing and putting into final form their documentary.

“On June 22, 1999, the United States Supreme Court held in Olmstead v. L.C. that unjustified segregation of persons with disabilities constitutes discrimination in violation of Title II of the ADA. The Court held that public entities must provide community-based services to persons with disabilities when (1) such services are appropriate; (2) the affected persons do not oppose community-based treatment; and (3) community-based services can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the public entity and the needs of others who are receiving disability services from the entity.

“The Supreme Court explained that its holding ‘reflects two evident judgments.’ First, ‘institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable of or unworthy of participating in community life.’ Second, ‘confinement in an institution severely diminishes the everyday life activities of individuals, including family relations, social contacts, work options, economic independence, educational advancement, and cultural enrichment.’”

To view the award winning documentary, click here.