Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act
On September 17, 2008, the House passed the final version of the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, S. 3406. This legislation overturns four erroneous Supreme Court decisions that have eroded the protections of people with disabilities under the ADA, restoring original Congressional intent. This legislation was signed into law on September 25, 2008.
This legislation:
- Overturns the erroneous Supreme Court decisions that have eroded the protections for people with disabilities under the ADA, restoring original Congressional intent.
- Rejects strict interpretation of the definition of disability, and makes it absolutely clear that the ADA is intended to provide broad coverage to protect anyone who faces discrimination on the basis of disability.
- Strikes a balance between employer and employee interests.
- Prohibits the consideration of mitigating measures such as medication, prosthetics, and assistive technology, in determining whether an individual has a disability.
- Covers people who experience discrimination based on a perception of impairment regardless of whether the individual experiences disability.
- Provides that reasonable accommodations are only required for individuals who can demonstrate they have an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, or a record of such impairment. Accommodations need not be provided to an individual who is only “regarded as” having an impairment.
- Is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights groups, disability advocates, and employer trade organizations.
Background:
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 was intended to “provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” Just as other civil rights laws prohibit entities from basing decisions on characteristics like race or sex, Congress wanted the ADA to stop employers from making decisions based on disability.
Unfortunately, four U.S. Supreme Court decisions have narrowed the definition of disability so much that people with serious conditions such as epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, cancer, diabetes, and cerebral palsy have been determined to not meet the definition of disability under the ADA.
The result: In 2004, plaintiffs lost 97% of ADA employment discrimination claims that went to trial, often due to the interpretation of definition of disability. People who are not hired or are fired because an employer mistakenly believes they cannot perform the job – or because the employer does not want “people like that” in the workplace – have been denied protection from employment discrimination due to these court decisions. This was not the intent of the ADA.