Bill Limiting Public Accommodations Suits Unanimously Passes California Senate

See the latest from the Sacramento Bee.

Is the South Dakota Medical Licensing Board Violating the ADA?

That's the provocative question this op-ed asks.  The key grafs:

In March, the South Dakota Medical Board filed a public reprimand against a young physician within our state because of his previous diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. The reprimand came about after the applicant answered these personal questions on his application to the state board. The board’s inquires about illness and addiction do not elicit meaningful knowledge regarding competence and go against the ADA. These questions fail to achieve ostensible goals of protecting the public. Instead of violating the applicant’s privacy with questions that do not satisfy the state’s interest of protecting the public, why not ask questions about their conduct? 

This example of a state-written public reprimand for this doctor’s diagnosis of multiple sclerosis flaunts a misuse of power by the board.

Bipartisan Support for CRPD

See this article from Politico.  Excerpts:

A bipartisan group of senators said the United States must fully endorse a United Nations convention on rights for the disabled, noting the challenges many wounded veterans face while traveling abroad.

* * * 

Senators taking part in Friday's announcement were: McCain, Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.)

Sixth Circuit Rejects Sole Cause Test for ADA Claims

See this article: 6th Circuit shifts test for disability discrimination.  Analysis will follow after the long weekend.

Salon on Seclusion, Restraint, and Arrests of Students with Disabilities

See this article.

Washington Post on Institutional Parents' Opposition to DOJ-Virginia Olmstead Settlement

See this article.

Mitt Romney Wants to Voucherize IDEA

IDEA as camel's nose for school vouchers goes national.  See this position paper released today by the Romney campaign.

Might Virginia Be Risking Another Olmstead Suit?

This time on mental health?  The state's inspector general suggests so:

Virginia, already mired in a $2 billion settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, is again at risk of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act — this time for failing to release discharge-ready patients from state-run behavioral-health hospitals. 

During a six-month period of review by the state’s inspector general for behavioral health, an average of 165 people per month were clinically ready to be released from Virginia’s eight adult mental-health hospitals, but could not be discharged — most often because of a lack of community-based housing. 

During the review, about 13 percent of the system’s beds were occupied for more than 30 days by patients who had been cleared to leave. The operating capacity of the state’s eight facilities was 1,514 as of July 1.

NY AG Announces Big Public Accommodations Access Settlements

See this article, which begins:

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says three retail chains have agreed to ensure that people with disabilities have equal access to the merchandise, services, and amenities in all their stores statewide.

The chains are JC Penney, Century 21, and Petland, with over 100 locations total covered by the settlement.

New NDRN Report on Medical Procedures That Violate the Rights of People with Disabilities

Just out from the National Disability Rights Network: a very important report entitled Devaluing People with Disabilities: Medical Procedures that Violate Civil Rights.  From the Executive Summary:

Five years ago, news broke worldwide that a six-year-old child with developmental and physical disabilities, Ashley, was given growth attenuation treatment via estrogen and had her uterus and breast buds removed. The intent of the treatment was to keep her permanently small. The child’s parents and doctors claimed that this set of procedures was in her best interest for numerous reasons, including that it would make it easier to care for her at home. Supporters of the treatment claim that this is the most personal of family decisions and there is no need for external judicial review of the decisions made by the family.

People with disabilities and advocates in the disability rights movement, however, assert that all individuals, regardless of their disability status, have individual rights that cannot be ignored. Decisions like those made in this case are the most personal of “personal rights,” not “family rights.” Every individual person has the right to bodily integrity, clearly recognized in our legal tradition, through the constitutional rights of liberty and privacy and the common law right to be left alone unless the individual chooses to have their body disturbed in some way. Individuals with disabilities, no matter the nature or severity of their disability, are no different. The Constitution and antidiscrimination laws make it clear, all people, including people with disabilities, are entitled to equal treatment under the law. 

* * * 

Devaluing People with Disabilities: Medical Procedures that Violate Civil Rights provides a crucial, but missing, link in the discussion about how society can and should make medical decisions that uphold the rights and inherent dignity of people with disabilities.

The report puts individuals with disabilities at the center of this discourse. It reviews the facts of Ashley X, as a case study for a larger discussion and presents a continuum of common experiences and treatment of individuals with disabilities within a context of medical decision making. The report explores the potential and actual conflict of interest that medical decision making may present between a parent and his or her child. It describes the vital role that the legal system has in ensuring that the civil and human rights of individuals with disabilities are protected. The report discusses how the deprivation of these rights is harm within and of itself and that all individuals have substantive rights regardless of the severity of their disability. It goes on to outline how discrimination inherently causes harm to both the person who experiences the discriminatory conduct and society as a whole. Finally, the report presents a series of recommendations for how the legal and medical systems at the local, state, and national level, including protection and advocacy agencies, ethics committees, institutional review boards, and the courts can perform critical “watchdog” functions to ensure that the human and civil rights of individuals with disabilities are protected.

Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Deficiencies in Georgia Personal Care Homes

See this article, which begins:

Deficiencies in care, living conditions and record-keeping have piled up in scores of Georgia personal care homes, with the state rarely shutting down violators or levying heavy fines, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has found. 

An analysis of five years worth of inspections, violations and enforcement actions revealed that many frequent violators have faced nothing more than a fine of a few hundred dollars. 

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s investigation found numerous troubling instances — from live cockroaches in the kitchen of one home to another in which eight residents were out of medication.

Ninth Circuit Holds ADA Does Not Bar California Cities from Shutting Down Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in James v. City of Costa Mesa.  The case, brought by individuals who lawfully use medical marijuana under California law, sought to challenge efforts by two California cities to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries.  The district court denied the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed.  Judge Fisher, writing for himself and Judge Pregerson, explained the court's ruling:

Concerned about the possible shutdown of the collectives they rely on to obtain medical marijuana, the plaintiffs brought this action in federal district court, alleging that the cities’ actions violate Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination in the provi- sion of public services.  District Judge Guilford sympathized with the plaintiffs, but denied their application for preliminary injunctive relief on the ground that the ADA does not protect against discrimination on the basis of marijuana use, even medical marijuana use supervised by a doctor in accordance with state law, unless that use is authorized by federal law.

We affirm. We recognize that the plaintiffs are gravely ill, and that their request for ADA relief implicates not only their right to live comfortably, but also their basic human dignity. We also acknowledge that California has embraced marijuana as an effective treatment for individuals like the plaintiffs who face debilitating pain. Congress has made clear, however, that the ADA defines “illegal drug use” by reference to federal, rather than state, law, and federal law does not authorize the plaintiffs’ medical marijuana use. We therefore necessarily conclude that the plaintiffs’ medical marijuana use is not protected by the ADA.

Judge Berzon dissented in part.

The LA Times's coverage of the decision appears here.

Popeyes Apologizes to Man with Service Dog

See this article by that title from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  It begins:

The Popeyes restaurant chain said Monday it has apologized to the college student asked to leave a Cobb County location because he had his service dog with him. 

Taylor Gipson, 20, has Type 1 diabetes and relies on a British Lab named Bear to alert him to rises or drops in his blood sugar levels, he told the AJC. But during a recent visit to the Popeyes on Windy Hill Road near Marietta, Gipson was asked to leave by the store manager, who then called police. 

"After reviewing all of the facts, I think we could have handled the situation better," Wendy Harkness, chief legal officer for Popeyes' parent company, told the AJC in a statement Monday.

SLU is Sued by Ex-Med Student with Learning Disability

See this article by that title in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.  It begins:

St. Louis University's medical school is being sued by a former student with a learning disability who says he wasn't given enough time to complete tests. 

The lawsuit, claiming violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, was filed last week in federal court in St. Louis on behalf of the student, who was identified as John Doe. The lawsuit says the student was kicked out of the SLU medical school after failing multiple timed tests required to progress through school.

Flint Agrees to Increase Accessibility at Polling Sites

See this article by that title in the Detroit Free Press.  It begins:

The City of Flint has agreed to make polling places more accessible for the mobility impaired in time for the November presidential election, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit announced today.

Acting on a complaint, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division conducted a study which showed a substantial number of Flint polling places were not accessible to people in wheelchairs.

The city recently signed a legal document pledging to make all of its polling places accessible to the mobility impaired head off a federal lawsuit. The agreement is designed to bring Flint into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Nations Must Protect Their Children, Not Their Reputations

See this op-ed by that title by Laurie Ahearn in the Washington Post.  It begins:

The Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, seems to be in hot water again. A Turkish court has accused her of “acquiring footage and violating the privacy” of children in a Turkish state-run orphanage. Her trial began two weeks ago in Ankara in absentia, following Britain’s refusal to extradite the former royal. The charges, which carry a maximum sentence of up to 22 1 / 2 years in prison , are a result of her participation in an undercover documentary that aired on Britain’s ITV in 2008 , exposing abuses in the facility. 

The hypocrisy of the Turkish government in prosecuting the duchess, who courageously exposed torture and neglect of Turkish children, is appalling. Turkish officials seem concerned with the privacy of children, most of whom have intellectual and physical disabilities, even as they violate those children’s most basic human rights.

D. Or. Holds That Olmstead Applies to Integrated-Employment Claims

On Thursday, United States Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon issued an opinion addressing the state's motion to dismiss in Lane v. Kitzhaber, a case about which I've blogged before.  Lane challenges the state's provision of employment services to people with disabilities in segregated sheltered workshops as a violation of the ADA's integration mandate.  Magistrate Judge Stewart rejected the state's arguments that the Olmstead integration mandate does not apply to employment services and held that the case could proceed.  She interpreted certain allegations in the plaintiffs' complaint as seeking impermissibly to impose a standard of care, which Olmstead held was not required by the ADA, so she ordered the plaintiffs to submit a new complaint omitting those allegations.

All told, this is a very significant decision.  It's the first case to hold that individuals with disabilities can bring an Olmstead claim to challenge their unnecessary placement in segregated employment programs, though I'm sure it won't be the last.