Advocacy Roundup
Policy and rights developments: the Supreme Court overturns Chevron deference, raising concerns for disability regulations, and the DOJ cites multiple states for ADA violations.
Disability Advocates Express Concern Over Recent Supreme Court Ruling
The U.S. Supreme Court has overturned a 40-year precedent that required courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous laws. This change, resulting from the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo case, overrules the 1984 Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council decision.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. stated that courts must now independently determine if agencies are acting within their authority without deferring to the agencies' interpretations. This ruling raises concerns among disability advocates, who fear it could lead to numerous legal challenges against federal regulations protecting disability rights.
Federal regulations are crucial for implementing laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Advocates worry that the new ruling might result in more cautious regulatory approaches and an increase in litigation, potentially undermining decades of progress in disability rights.
Experts emphasize that the regulatory process involves subject matter experts and public comments, ensuring that the needs of people with disabilities are considered. The shift to court interpretations could overlook these expert insights, leading to less informed and consistent legal decisions affecting people with disabilities.
US Department of Justice Cites Multiple States For Disability Rights Violations
On the 25th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Olmstead v. L.C. decision, which affirmed the rights of people with disabilities to live in the community, the Department of Justice is addressing violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in multiple states. Investigations revealed that Utah and Missouri are unnecessarily segregating people with disabilities, while Alaska, Ohio, and Alabama have violated the rights of voters with disabilities.
In Utah, the state relies too much on sheltered workshops and day programs, segregating individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) and limiting their interaction with others. Missouri was found to be over-institutionalizing adults with mental health disabilities in nursing facilities due to insufficient community-based services and over-reliance on guardianships. Alaska failed to provide accessible voting options, including accessible ballots, polling places, and an elections website. Ohio and Alabama also faced scrutiny for not adequately supporting voters with disabilities.
Advocates have applauded the Justice Department's actions, recognizing them as steps toward fulfilling Olmstead’s promise while cautioning that continuous effort is needed to achieve true, full integration of people with disabilities into society.