Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Americans with Disabilities Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Americans with Disabilities Act. Show all posts

Monday, November 2, 2026

Olmstead and the Threat to People with Disabilities

  In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

In June, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  DOJ stated it “will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement” of the ADA, and that Olmstead is “not enforceable.”That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

In a memo in June, the Justice Department asserted a new interpretation of a decades-old Supreme Court decision that has required the government to provide care to people with significant disabilities in their own communities whenever possible, rather than segregating them in institutions.

That Supreme Court decision put in place new limits and obligations and changed what it means to live with a disability in America — whether you’re a homeless person with mental illness, a preschooler with cerebral palsy or a nursing home resident with Alzheimer’s.

Now, many families caring for someone with a significant disability see an emerging threat to government obligations they have long relied on.

Those obligations include public benefits that the administration has sought to limit in other ways, like Medicaid. In one case in Florida, the Justice Department already appears to be using its reinterpretation of the law to argue that the government is not required to provide at-home care for children with complex medical conditions.

More such cases could follow, potentially upending the way people with disabilities receive care in any number of states. Among the many people who could be affected by the Florida case is a 13-year-old boy named Dylan Webb who has A.D.H.D. and autism, as well as a blood-clotting disorder and a heart condition that requires constant access to a defibrillator.
...

The staffing of Dylan’s nurses is governed by a court order that covers thousands of children in Florida with complex medical needs. It emerged from an anti-discrimination lawsuit, one of many where the federal government pressed states to do more to prevent disabled people from being put in institutions.

At a trial in 2023, the federal judge in Florida, Donald Middlebrooks, heard stories of enormous hardship. One grandmother testified she had lost her home because, with patchy nursing care for the grandson who lived with her, she couldn’t work consistently. In a decision ordering more in-home nursing, the judge wrote that when nursing shifts went unfilled, families endured harrowing conditions trying to keep their children from growing up in pediatric nursing homes.

But the Justice Department is seeking to undo the judge’s order in Florida, citing the legal position on disability rights that the office took in the June memo, when it said states were not required to provide care for disabled people at home and in their communities whenever possible.

Thursday, October 22, 2026

Joint Catholic Letter to Congress on Olmstead v. L.C.

  In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 


In June, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  DOJ stated it “will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement” of the ADA, and that Olmstead is “not enforceable.”That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

October 14, 2026

Dear Senator/Representative:

On June 18, the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) at the Department of Justice (DOJ), in a slip opinion, announced a reversal of its longstanding position implementing the Supreme Court’s Olmstead v. L.C. opinion, that Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires states to provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate to an individual’s needs. Notwithstanding its measured legal language, the OLC slip opinion constitutes a radical undertaking that, in its own words, is admittedly “out of step with the common understanding” of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Olmstead v. L.C. and how it is interpreted by “the vast majority of courts.”[1]

This announcement is deeply troubling. Subsequent actions taken by DOJ call into question its commitment to enforce the integration mandate and will lead to widespread pain and suffering among persons with disabilities and their families. We urge Congress to do everything in its power to affirm the rights of persons living with disabilities to flourish in their families and communities. Congress must act to protect the programs, policies, and resources that persons with disabilities and their families rely on to thrive.

In their pastoral statement on persons with disabilities, the Catholic bishops of the United States note the Church’s defense of the right to life


implies the defense of other rights that enable the disabled individual to achieve the fullest measure of personal development of which he or she is capable. These include the right to equal opportunity in education, in employment, in housing, as well as the right to free access to public accommodations, facilities, and services.[2]

Institutionalization should be a last resort because it deprives persons of these rights and opportunities while also stripping communities of the presence and participation of such persons.

Our parishes, schools, and social and health ministries in every diocese in this nation are enriched and blessed by the opportunity to worship with, serve alongside, and learn from persons with disabilities. It is in these interactions that we recognize that too often “[w]hen we think of persons with disabilities in relation to ministry, we tend automatically to think of doing something for them. We do not reflect that they can do something for us and with us.”[3] Institutionalization is a top-down approach, the very warehousing of the most vulnerable, and the result is that we all suffer.

There is a more humane and just path forward--the family, which Church teaching regards as essential for persons to flourish. The bishops have noted that the “central importance of family members in the lives of all persons with disabilities, regardless of age, must never be underestimated.”[4] In this vein, when the Supreme Court decided Olmstead in 1999, it recognized that most persons with disabilities can thrive with their families or in community-based settings, and that the government has an obligation to support them to the extent possible. As a result, Catholic hospitals, charities, schools, ministries, and parishes across the country work with public services to ensure persons with disabilities and their families have the resources they need to live healthy, vibrant, and productive lives. The Supreme Court's decision in Olmstead is a linchpin of this system; without its civil rights framework, persons with disabilities, their families, and the community organizations that support them simply will not have access to the resources they need and deserve. The re-institutionalization of persons with disabilities in substandard and possibly inhumane conditions is a foreseeable consequence of the DOJ’s recent move to reinterpret the decision.

A government’s most hallowed moral obligation is to protect the life and dignity of everyone, from conception through natural death. Ensuring that persons with disabilities have the support and resources they need to lead safe, healthy, and productive lives flows directly from this obligation.

We support members in Congress who have already called on the Administration to rescind the OLC's June 18, 2026, slip opinion undermining Olmstead and encourage other members to join that effort. Congress should do everything in its power to protect persons living with disabilities--including reaffirming that the ADA requires states and local governments to provide services to persons with disabilities in their communities when appropriate. We stand ready to collaborate with you in this important work.

Sincerely,

Most Rev. Shelton J. Fabre
Archbishop of Louisville
Chair, Committee on Domestic Justice & Human Development
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Most Rev. Edward J. Burns
Bishop of Dallas
Chair, Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life & Youth
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Sister Mary Haddad, RSM
President & CEO
Catholic Health Association of the United States

Mr. Leo Zanchettin
Board Chair
National Catholic Partnership on Disability

Ms. Kerry Alys Robinson
President & CEO
Catholic Charities USA

Rev. Chris Kellerman, S.J.
Secretary of Justice & Ecology
Jesuit Conference of Canada & the United States

[1] Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. (2026). “Application of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act to State Institutional of Patients with Severe Mental Illness or Disabilities.” Available: justice.gov/olc/media/1446701/dl

[2] United States Catholic Conference (1978). Pastoral Statement of U.S. Catholic Bishops on Persons with Disabilities. p.3. Available: usccb.org/resources/pastoral-statement-persons-disabilities

[3] Ibid at p.5.

[4] Ibid at p.5.

Joint Catholic Letter to Congress on Olmstead v. L.C.

Tuesday, September 15, 2026

Governors Push Back on DOJ's Efforts to Undercut Olmstead

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 


In August, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Eighteen governors signed a letter asking the Justice Department to stop its efforts to undercut enforcement of the Olmstead decision.  

For nearly four decades, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has embodied a fundamental national commitment that disability should not be a basis for exclusion or diminished opportunity.  States have worked with local and federal government partners since 1990 to implement both the letter and spirit of this much-celebrated, bipartisan law.  On June 18, 2026, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal opinion that questions the longstanding legal framework surrounding the rights of Americans with disabilities to live with dignity, independence, and full community participation.  On July 20, 2026, the DOJ declared that it will not rely on its own longstanding Olmstead guidance, issued June 22, 2011. 

As Governors, we are deeply concerned by the federal government’s retreat from its longstanding role in protecting the right to community integration and that such actions signal changes to programs serving individuals with disabilities. For more than 25 years, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C. has built on the commitment of the ADA and reinforced the principle that people with disabilities should have the opportunity to live, work, receive services, and participate in their communities rather than being unnecessarily segregated in institutional settings. This is a principle Americans are proud of and is a Northstar internationally for people with disabilities. 

This principle has changed lives and transformed this country. Red and blue states have spent decades investing in home and community based services, developing supportive housing, expanding access to education and employment opportunities, and redesigning and strengthening community based services.  These efforts reflect not only our progress under federal civil rights law, but our shared conviction that people with disabilities belong in their communities, whenever possible.  

Recent actions have already created significant uncertainty for states and for the workforce of dedicated individuals who support people with disabilities throughout the country.  More importantly, people with disabilities and their families are terrified about moving backwards - or worse - becoming institutionalized against their will - after decades of advocacy.  We simply cannot risk reversing the progress this country has made in ensuring Americans with disabilities have meaningful choices about where and how they live their lives.   

We strongly oppose any federal actions that would weaken protections against unnecessary segregation or diminish the right of people with disabilities to receive services in the most integrated settings appropriate to meet their needs, consistent with established Olmstead precedent.  Community integration is not an abstract legal concept. It means having a home, being able to work, attend school, shop, worship, build relationships, and participate in an ordinary civic life.  

This is not a partisan issue. The ADA was enacted with overwhelming bipartisan support and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. The continued movement toward community-based services has progressed under Republican and Democratic administrations and in states led by Governors of both parties.  States may differ in how we administer these services but we stand united around the basic principle that Americans with disabilities are full members of our communities and should not be forced into segregation to receive the services and support they need.   

We stand ready to work with the Administration and Congress to strengthen community-based systems while preserving individual choice.  We must ensure that our nation continues moving toward greater independence, inclusion, and opportunity for all Americans with disabilities.  We urge you not to turn back the clock on generations of progress.  

  •  Governor Kathy Hochul State of New York 
  • Governor Ned Lamont State of Connecticut 
  • Governor JB Pritzker State of Illinois 
  • Governor Wes Moore State of Maryland 
  • Governor Gretchen Whitmer State of Michigan 
  • Governor Mikie Sherrill State of New Jersey 
  • Governor Katie Hobbs State of Arizona 
  • Governor Matt Meyer State of Delaware 
  • Governor Janet Mills State of Maine 
  • Governor Maura Healey State of Massachusetts 
  • Governor Tim Walz State of Minnesota 
  • Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham State of New Mexico 
  • Governor Josh Stein State of North Carolina 
  • Governor Josh Shapiro State of Pennsylvania 
  • Governor Bob Ferguson State of Washington 
  • Governor Tina Kotek State of Oregon 
  • Governor Dan McKee State of Rhode Island 
  • Governor Tony Evers State of Wisconsin 

Thursday, August 20, 2026

Assault on Integration

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 


Last week, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Jonaki Mehta at NPR:
[In 1999] the Supreme Court handed down the Olmstead decision. It reinforced the ADA's integration mandate, which says people with disabilities should get to learn, live and work in their communities rather than in institutions. The government made that promise after people with disabilities fought against segregation in institutions, which have a long history of abuse and neglect.
...

In practice, the integration mandate requires that states provide people with disabilities the services they need to thrive in their homes or communities — in other words, in the most integrated setting possible. For someone with intellectual or developmental disabilities, that could mean a personal care worker helping them to get dressed or eat, or a case manager helping them find a job or housing, among other services.

Now, a lawsuit brought by several Republican-led states, Texas v. Kennedy, is working its way through the courts. The plaintiffs argue that the federal government cannot require states to provide disability services in the community rather than in institutions. Then, in June, the Department of Justice (DOJ), which enforces the integration mandate, issued a legal opinion taking a similar position — essentially aligning itself with the plaintiffs in the case. "Congress has not imposed an integration mandate on states," the memo reads. It goes on to say the Olmstead decision "held only that a state cannot institutionalize such patients without justification. … What counts as adequate justification remains an open question." In July, the DOJ also clarified that it would no longer enforce Olmstead in the same way it had in the past.

Saturday, January 10, 2026

Legal Literacy and Section 504

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Decker, J. R. (2025). Hidden Disabilities: The Urgent Need to Increase Section 504 Legal Literacy. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 0(0). https://doi-org.ccl.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/10442073251393335 

Abstract:

The hidden disabilities of students and staff in schools—which include medical and psychological conditions—have increased. Therefore, it is imperative that everyone in education is well versed in the law that protects them, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504). The limited research indicates that teachers, school leaders, and other school employees lack Section 504 legal literacy. This article aims to increase awareness of hidden disabilities by explaining what they are and emphasize their significance through a discussion of anxiety, asthma, and allergies. It also intends to address the problem of the lack of Section 504 legal literacy by answering frequently asked questions about Section 504. University instructors, special education directors, and others are invited to share this relevant legal guidance to increase the legal literacy of their students and coworkers. Overall, this article hopes to ensure that students and employees with disabilities in schools—who are not eligible under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)—receive better support and lawsuits are prevented. 

 



Thursday, July 31, 2025

The Future of Special Education Complaints

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities.

Lauren Wagner & Beth Hawkins at The 74:

The law that created the state complaint processes, the IDEA, guarantees disabled students’ educational rights. By contrast, the ADA, passed in 1990, outlaws discrimination against people who need accommodations to access public facilities and programs — including schools.

Families of children denied special education services can assert their rights under either law. When states fail to enforce a student’s educational rights under IDEA, families often file a discrimination complaint via the ADA.

In the 2022-23 school year, more than 54,000 state dispute resolution requests were filed in the U.S. and its territories, including due process complaints, written state complaints and mediation requests. The Office for Civil Rights had about 12,000 open cases — half of them involving disability discrimination — when its staff was slashed in March. For fiscal year 2026, which started July 1, the White House’s proposed OCR budget is $91 million, a 35% drop.

At the same time, the administration wants to move $33 million that currently funds state advocacy clearinghouses into block grants that states — cash-strapped as their federal pandemic funds run out — can use for other things. This means families risk losing a second source of leverage: free assistance from experts.

If enacted, both budget cuts would also exacerbate socioeconomic and racial disparities in the services kids with disabilities receive, says Carrie Gillispie, a senior policy analyst at New America. This is because families in states where there’s little appetite for local enforcement depend on OCR to investigate discrimination.

“Those discrepancies that exist will only worsen if these budget changes happen,” Gillispie says. “It’s a choice to continue to underinvest.”

With the federal office a hollow shell of what it was six months ago, advocates say, families are likely to rely more heavily on their states. And how — and how well — each state helps students with disabilities varies widely.




 

Saturday, July 26, 2025

ADA 35

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities.

On this day in 1990, George H.W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act:

 Barbara Merrill and Tony Coelho at TIME:
Yet, as we celebrate the ADA's enduring legacy this year, the future for people with disabilities looks less certain. The ADA’s vision is not self-sustaining. Its promise is fulfilled through an ecosystem of vital support services, many of which rely on Medicaid funding. For millions of Americans living with disabilities, Medicaid is a lifeline that provides access to essential home- and community-based services (HCBS). These services include the most basic activities of daily living like bathing, dressing, eating, and more, as well as the residential programs, employment supports, and assistive technologies that allow people with I/DD to live with dignity in their own homes and communities. These services are at the heart of the ADA and crucial to making inclusion a reality.


Following the passage of President Donald Trump’s tax bill, which will cut aproximately $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next several years, these support systems are in jeopardy. This attack on Medicaid threatens to unravel decades of progress toward equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities, as access to these services will undoubtedly become more limited.



 

Friday, June 13, 2025

SCOTUS and AJT v. Osseo Area Schools

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities.

Ronald Mann, Unanimous court rebuffs higher standard for discrimination claims by children with disabilities, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 12, 2025, 6:32 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/unanimous-court-rebuffs-higher-standard-for-discrimination-claims-by-children-with-disabilities/ 

In A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Independent School District No. 279, the Supreme Court considered the obligation of schools to refrain from discriminating on the basis of a disability. Specifically, the justices considered whether students face a higher bar in challenging such activity than disabled individuals do in other contexts. Thursday’s opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by all the justices, firmly rejected the higher standard adopted by the lower courts.

The case involved a pair of federal statutes that bar discrimination on the basis of disability, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Together with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, those statutes regulate the accommodations that local schools afford children with disabilities.

In part because of the detailed procedures the latter act establishes for identifying appropriate individualized educational programs, known as IEPs, for individual students, many lower courts have been reluctant to allow students to recover damages based on claims of discrimination without proving an actual intention on the part of the school districts to discriminate. The Supreme Court on Thursday rebuffed that approach, holding that the standard for proving discrimination is the same for all those with disabilities, students or otherwise.

Thursday, March 20, 2025

Trump's War on Americans with Disabilities

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 7.5 million children 3 to 21 years old received services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in AY 2022-23.

About 980,000 of them were autistic, up from 498,000 in 2012-13

Decades ago, schools legally turned away children with disabilities. Those who were admitted were often relegated to inferior classrooms. It was not until the passage of the law now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1975 that educational rights were federally protected for children with disabilities. Today, IDEA guarantees every child with disabilities the right to free, appropriate public education and 7.5 million students relied on IDEA-mandated services including speech therapy, individualized instruction, and classroom aides during the 2022–23 school year, the most recent year for which data is available. But these mandates don’t enforce or fund themselves. They require a federal backstop, an entity capable of ensuring that the thousands of school districts across the country comply. That entity is the Department of Education because even with protections like IDEA in place, students with disabilities often do not experience the educational equity many of their peers enjoy.

Trump has a bad record on disability more generally. 

Lauren Aratani at The Guardian:

The Department of Justice removed 11 guidelines for US businesses on compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including some that deal with Covid-19 and masking and accessibility.

The ADA was signed into law in 1990 and is the key civil rights law that protects Americans with disabilities from discrimination.

Updates have already been made to the ADA.gov website to reflect the removal of the guidances. Multiple pages were removed from the ADA’s archive website, including one page that explained how retail businesses are required to have accessible features and another on customer service practices for hotel and lodging guests with disabilities.

In a webpage titled “Covid-19 and the Americans with Disabilities Act”, the justice department removed five out of seven questions that were listed on the page as recently as recently as early March

 

Sunday, February 16, 2025

A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools

In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

 Julia Metraux at Mother Jones:
Minnesota teenager Ava T. lives with seizures that predominate in the morning, preventing her from attending school safely before noon. When her suburban Minneapolis school district refused to update her individualized education plan—a disability accommodation guaranteed by federal law—to allow at-home evening instruction to compensate, Ava and her parents sued in 2021.

A district court sided with Ava and her family—her last name is withheld—ruling in 2022 that the school district had violated her rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. But separate complaints say that the district had breached Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, which include extensive disability rights provisions. In five of the 13 federal circuit courts, including the Eighth Circuit, which covers Minnesota, families suing schools under Section 504 and the ADA have to prove “bad faith or gross misjudgment,” a standard the Eighth Circuit said Ava’s case did not meet—despite acknowledging that the family “may have established a genuine dispute about whether the district was negligent or even deliberately indifferent.”

The Supreme Court agreed to hear Ava’s case, A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, in January. Its ruling will decide whether that tougher standard—bad faith is notoriously hard to prove—applies nationwide under Section 504 and the ADA when suing schools. A ruling against Ava and her family could be a major setback for student disability rights enforcement and an equally major boon for the Trump administration’s plan to gut the Department of Education at the expense of disabled kids

Sunday, November 3, 2024

Ted Kennedy Jr. on Trump and Disabilities



Ted Kennedy Jr. is an amputee and disability rights lawyer.  He write at The Hartford Courant:
President Trump has repeatedly ridiculed and demeaned people with disabilities and consistently shown a lack of respect and understanding of our community. He has publicly mocked a reporter with limb differences, called Sen. John McCain and other decorated disabled veterans “losers,” and made fun of President Biden’s stutter. His former Chief of Staff, John Kelly, reported his reluctance to be photographed with disabled American veterans “because it doesn’t look good for me.” Trump even suggested to his own nephew, Fred, who has a child with severe disabilities, that people like Fred’s son “should just die.” Court records show that Trump, as a landlord, has been sued at least eight times for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, dragging out cases for years, trying to avoid responsibility, and shifting blame to others. Trump has no understanding of what life is truly like for disabled people, and his hurtful rhetoric and appalling behavior reveal a deeply troubling disregard for the dignity and worth of disabled Americans.

... 

Until Trump took office in 2017, the expansion of civil rights of people with disabilities benefited from strong bipartisan congressional support. In fact, the ADA was championed by prominent Republicans, including then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburg, and President George H.W. Bush. This spirit of bipartisan cooperation allowed disability rights to continue to expand.

Kennedy lists ways in which Trump turned back the clock.

Medicaid Financing and Home-Based Care: The administration proposed shifting more Medicaid costs to the states, which would have reduced funding for home and community-based services. Nearly 15 million people with disabilities, who rely on Medicaid for personal caregivers, would have faced a financially forced transfer to institutional care.

Weakening the Department of Justice’s Disability Rights Section: Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded 27 critical ADA guidance documents, relied upon for years by both parties, to interpret and enforce the ADA. Under Trump, civil rights enforcement for people with disabilities ground to a halt, leaving countless cases of discrimination unaddressed.

...
Cuts to Special Education and Independent Living Services: Trump’s administration slashed Medicaid funding to schools, depriving children with disabilities of essential medical care and equipment enabling them to pursue their education. Trump also cut funding to Independent Living Centers, vocational rehabilitation programs, assistive technology and even to Special Olympics, only avoided due to public outrage.


Tuesday, August 20, 2024

Democratic Platform on Disabilities

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns. As in 2020, the Democrats have a detailed plank on disability.  The Republican platform does not even mention the word.

From the 2024 Democratic Platform:
People with disabilities have long strengthened our economy and expanded our nation’s possibilities. And, groundbreaking legislation like the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act have made significant strides toward equal opportunity for people with disabilities. But there is more work to do. People with disabilities are three times less likely to have a job, and when they do, they are often paid less money for doing the same work.

Democrats are taking action to fix that. President Biden signed an executive order establishing a government-wide commitment to advancing equality and equity in federal employment, including for people with disabilities. The Labor Department is protecting workers with disabilities and fighting to end unjust employment practices. The Administration is helping state and local governments, businesses, and nonprofits access federal funds to hire more disabled Americans. And President Biden is making sure his Administration looks like America, appointing people with disabilities to positions all across our government. He is making the federal government a model employer when it comes to wages, accommodations, and opportunities to advance for people with disabilities. And he’s helping young people with disabilities transition from education to employment through the Disability Innovation Fund.

Democrats will enforce laws that ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities: the ADA, IDEA, the Fair Housing Act, the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Mental Health Parity Act, and the Help America Vote Act. We oppose efforts to weaken the ADA and build on the ACA to prevent health care discrimination. Democrats will enforce the Olmstead integration mandate and enforce
non-discrimination protections in health care, employment, education, housing, voting. We
will promote equitable treatment of students with disabilities so every child with disabilities can thrive. And to support people with disabilities and their families, we will support home and community-based care and end the subminimum wage.

President Biden is also working to improve health care for people with disabilities. The Administration released a rule barring providers from denying medical treatments related to organ donations or lifesaving care for disabled Americans based on their disability alone. It launched long COVID clinical trials and created the Office of Long COVID Research and Practice. The National Institutes of Health designated people with disabilities a “health disparity population,” unlocking new resources for research. President Biden also signed an executive order increasing access to quality care and supporting caregivers; as well as historic legislation that expands home- and community-based services under Medicaid.

Accessible public spaces are essential to ensuring equal opportunity for people with disabilities. Democrats have invested in accessible infrastructure, including rail station accessibility and actions to make airports and airplanes more accessible. And Democrats passed and President Biden signed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which expanded access to affordable broadband, an especially important step for people with disabilities.

Trump has a long record of discrimination against people with disabilities, including publicly mocking them. His business has faced a series of lawsuits for failing to comply with the ADA. Discrimination complaints from federal workers with disabilities employed at Cabinet-level agencies increased 20 percent while he was president, and in his first year in office, the number of people with disabilities fired by the government increased 24 percent, with workers with disabilities fired at almost two times the rate of workers without disabilities.

 Democrats will enforce laws that ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities: the ADA, IDEA, the Fair Housing Act, the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Mental Health Parity Act, and the Help America Vote Act. We oppose efforts to weaken the ADA and build on the ACA to prevent health care discrimination. Democrats will enforce the Olmstead integration mandate and enforce on-discrimination protections in health care, employment, education, housing, voting. We will promote equitable treatment of students with disabilities so every child with disabilities can thrive. And to support people with disabilities and their families, we will support home and community-based care and end the subminimum wage

Trump repeatedly proposed billions in cuts to Social Security Disability Insurance and called for restrictions on eligibility and benefit cutbacks. He called to cut funding for special education grants and eliminate federal funding for the Special Olympics. He has promised to close the Department of Education, threatening enforcement of IDEA protections for students with disabilities. And he rescinded guidance protecting students with disabilities, including guidance aimed at ensuring students with disabilities were not unfairly disciplined.

.

Saturday, July 27, 2024

Disabilities and the 2024 Campaign

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.   In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism.  He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally. 

Eric Garcia at The Independent:
Democrats commemorated the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act by coming out swinging against Donald Trump, after his nephew claimed in a new memoir that the former president once suggested people with disabilities “should just die.”

“It’s hard to describe the pain millions of Americans with disabilities are feeling in response to Donald Trump’s newly-reported comments against folks with disabilities,” Senator Tammy Duckworth, who lost both of her legs serving in the Iraq War, said in a statement shared by the Democratic National Committee on Friday.

“But we know this is nothing new for him — he mocked a reporter with a physical disability, dismissed traumatic brain injuries as ‘not very serious,’ attempted to slash support for disabled veterans and so much more. Any human being who suggests that people with disabilities ‘should just die’ is fundamentally unfit to serve.”

Friday marks 34 years since former President George H W Bush, a Republican, signed the Americans with Disabilities Act into law, thanks to bipartisan collaboration in Congress.

In recent years, there has been less agreeement between parties on disability rights. The DNC’s release points out that Trump faced multiple lawsuits during his presidency claiming that his properties did not comply with the ADA and also notes his attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which would have reduced funding for Medicaid, which many people with disabilities rely on to receive care in their homes.

The Republican National Committee’s “research” account on X has also taken heat for mocking Vice President Kamala Harris in 2022 for describing what she was wearing, a common practice to aid people who are blind or who have low-vision. The Republican National Committee did not release a statement commemorating the law.
Democrats also noted how Project 2025 proposes eliminating the Department of Education, which enforces accommodations for students with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Saturday, June 22, 2024

Olmstead at 25


In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

At STAT, Timmy Broderick writes about the 25th anniversary of the Olmstead decision.
Prolonged, involuntary stays in institutions used to be the norm for people with disabilities, as books like “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest” have portrayed. But after two Georgia women with mental illness and developmental disabilities sued to leave a state hospital, the Supreme Court decreed in 1999 that siloing people with disabilities in hospitals was discriminatory and a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

This landmark ruling, known as the Olmstead decision, augured a shift away from institutional care for long-term services and towards the most integrated setting possible — treating people with disabilities not as outcasts but as community members who can make choices and decide their own futures. The name refers to the main defendant, Tommy Olmstead, the commissioner of the Georgia Department of Human Resources at the time. Some experts refer to it as the Brown v. Board of Education for people with disabilities because of its dramatic expansion of civil rights in the face of forced segregation and a rejection of “separate but equal” institutions.

...

Twenty-five years after the Olmstead decision, home and community-based services (HCBS) is the norm rather than the exception for Medicaid recipients. National Medicaid spending on HCBS routinely exceeds spending on institutional services, and nearly 10 million people received some form of HCBS in 2019. Most states now have “Olmstead plans” that sketch out how to further grow community care, too.

But those gains are unevenly distributed, and disability advocates have had to sue several states to ensure their compliance.

...

Twenty-five years after the Olmstead decision, home and community-based services (HCBS) is the norm rather than the exception for Medicaid recipients. National Medicaid spending on HCBS routinely exceeds spending on institutional services, and nearly 10 million people received some form of HCBS in 2019. Most states now have “Olmstead plans” that sketch out how to further grow community care, too.

But those gains are unevenly distributed, and disability advocates have had to sue several states to ensure their compliance.

Wednesday, June 19, 2024

An Injunction in Connecticut

 In The Politics of Autism, I write:  "Support from the general public will be an important political asset for autistic people. Another will be their sheer numbers, since a larger population of identified autistic adults will mean more autistic voters and activists."  Previous posts have discussed autistic officeholders and political candidates in California,  New York, Georgia, Texas, and Wisconsin.

Chris Dehnel at Enfield Patch:

A Connecticut judge has ordered an injunction against the Enfield Board of Education as part of a lawsuit brought forth by a former board member who is both autistic and deaf.

Sarah Hernandez, regarded as one of the first openly autistic people to run for, and be elected to, public office in Connecticut, filed a lawsuit against the school board, the town of Enfield and then-board chairman Walter Kruzel in late 2019. The suit claims she was discriminated against in violation of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act.

On June 14, United States District Judge Stefan R. Underhill announced the injunction in Bridgeport.

... 

SEE THE TEXT HERE 

The injunction was the next step in the lawsuit after a federal jury in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport sided with Hernandez in January, finding the board and the town discriminated against her in violation of Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act for failing to provide her with basic accommodations needed to equally participate as a member of the board.

Hernandez was elected to the school board in 2017, running for a seat because she wanted to "show up and be a voice for people with autism in the decision-making process," she said upon filing the suit.

She has difficulty hearing and understanding telephone conversations and in-person conversations unless she gets written materials, can see the speakers and can take notes. She asked the board to communicate with her between meetings in writing, such as by email and text, and to provide written materials and an erasable white board for note-taking, according to the lawsuit.

Although the board agreed to the accommodations, Kruzel and other board officials refused to follow through, repeatedly insisting on communicating by telephone between meetings and refusing to provide written information or a white board for executive sessions. Her requests were often met with open hostility and anger, according to the lawsuit.