U.S. Department
of Justice
Disability Rights Cases
Allegheny County Jail
On November 30, 2023, Allegheny County agreed to offer treatment with any FDA-approved medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) to all individuals booked into the Allegheny County Jail (ACJ) for whom such treatment is medically appropriate. The County also agreed to pay $10,000 to an individual the United States alleged was unlawfully denied access to methadone in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Under the three-year agreement, Allegheny County will implement new policies and personnel training programs to ensure that people with OUD incarcerated at ACJ receive medically appropriate treatment for their disability. This includes ensuring that all individuals who were receiving OUD medication from a licensed treatment provider before their incarceration are continued on that medication. The County will also offer the option to all individuals with OUD booked into ACJ to receive treatment with any FDA-approved OUD medication that is medically appropriate even if they were not being treated with that medication before their incarceration.
United States v. City of Blaine, Minnesota
On November 20, 2023, the United States filed a Complaint and proposed Consent Decree to resolve allegations that the City of Blaine, Minnesota violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act by discriminating against an employee with alcohol use disorder. The lawsuit alleges that the city discriminated against the employee, who voluntarily disclosed that he was to undergo treatment, by requiring him to pay for alcohol and controlled substances testing and evaluation based on his disability. Under the Consent Decree, the City will implement non-discrimination policies and procedures, train its staff on the ADA, and pay out-of-pocket losses and compensatory damages to the complainant.
Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry
On July 19, 2023, the Justice Department sent a letter to the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry (ADCRR), notifying ADCRR that it violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act by discriminating against individuals with vision disabilities. Following an investigation of multiple complaints by incarcerated individuals, the Department found that ADCRR failed to reasonably modify its policies or provide auxiliary aids and services, such as Brailled materials, audio recordings, and screen reader software, to ensure that people with disabilities could communicate effectively while incarcerated. ADCRR failed to provide accessible processes for requesting accommodations or filing disability-related complaints. ADCRR also over relied on other incarcerated people to help people with vision disabilities without properly training or supervising those providing help.
On November 16, 2023, the Justice Department executed a settlement agreement with ADCRR to correct and prevent discrimination against incarcerated people with vision disabilities and to resolve the Justice Department's findings. Under the three-year agreement, ADCRR will retain an expert consultant to help revise its policies and practices, train its personnel, and provide necessary modifications, aids and services, and assistive technology to people with vision disabilities in ADCRR custody. ADCRR will regularly report to the department and adopt robust screening and documentation procedures to ensure people with vision disabilities are provided with any aids and services they need throughout their incarceration. ADCRR will also designate a systemwide ADA Administrator and Facility ADA Coordinators to ensure consistent implementation of the agreement across all state facilities.
Board of Election Commissioners for the City of St Louis, MO
On Jan. 12, 2021, the Justice Department reached a settlement under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of St. Louis to ensure that St. Louis polling places are accessible during elections to individuals with mobility and vision impairments. The department identified architectural barriers at St. Louis polling places, including inaccessible parking, ramps that were too steep, stairs at the only entrance or route to the voting area, and doorways with thresholds that were too high. The department also identified that the St. Louis Board fails to provide accessible curbside voting and auxiliary aids and services, including headphones for some accessible voting machines, and also fails to provide voters with disabilities the same amount of privacy and independence while voting as voters without disabilities. Under the agreement, the St. Louis Board will begin remediating its voting program. To make its selected polling places accessible, the St. Louis Board will employ temporary measures, such as portable ramps, signage, and propped open doors. In addition, the St. Louis Board will train its poll workers and other elections staff on the requirements of the ADA and how to use temporary measures to ensure each polling place is accessible during elections. The St. Louis Board will also survey polling locations for accessibility and maintain the accessibility of each polling place it uses on election days. When selecting future polling places, the agreement requires the St. Louis Board to select locations that will be accessible during elections.
On October 3, 2023, the Department and St. Louis Board agreed to modify and extend the agreement. The St. Louis Board will hire an expert for conducting or reviewing accessibility surveys, identifying appropriate temporary measures, and training staff. The agreement expires on July 11, 2025.
U.S. v. Colorado
On March 3, 2022, the United States sent its findings to the State, notifying it that Colorado is violating the ADA’s integration mandate in its provision of Long-Term Services and Supports to adults with physical disabilities. Following an investigation, the Department found that the State of Colorado has failed to meet its obligations under Title II of the ADA by unnecessarily segregating adults with physical disabilities in nursing facilities, and failing to ensure that individuals have a meaningful opportunity to live in community-based settings appropriate to their needs.
On September 29, 2023, the United States filed a lawsuit against the State of Colorado under Title II of the ADA. The United States alleges that Colorado is violating Title II’s integration mandate by unnecessarily segregating adults with physical disabilities in nursing facilities, and failing to ensure that individuals have a meaningful opportunity to live in community-based settings appropriate to their needs.
On October 31, 2024, the United States entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Colorado, resolving litigation under the integration mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act as interpreted in the Supreme Court decision Olmstead v. L.C. The United States alleged that Colorado provides services to individuals with physical disabilities in nursing facilities, which are segregated settings, and places other individuals at risk of unnecessary segregation, when these individuals could appropriately receive services in the community. The settlement agreement requires Colorado: to provide nursing facility residents with “in-reach” (i.e. counseling about their community living options); to ensure that nursing facility residents who wish to move to the community have access to a prompt and effective transition process; to help at least 2,000 nursing facility residents transition to the community; to identify individuals at risk of unnecessary nursing facility admission and help them avoid unwanted nursing facility admission; to rapidly reintegrate to the community individuals who enter nursing facilities but would prefer to live in the community; and to ensure that needed community-based services are available to individuals who live in and/or move to the community.
Press Release - Justice Department Sues Colorado for Violating the Americans with Disabilities Act [September 29, 2023]
Press Release - Justice Department Secures Settlement Agreement with Colorado to Ensure Opportunities for People with Physical Disabilities to Live at Home [November 1, 2024]
Marsters v. Healey
On September 20, 2023, the Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in Marsters, et al. v. Healey, et al. This private lawsuit was filed in the District of Massachusetts by the Massachusetts Senior Action Center and several adults with disabilities who live in nursing facilities in Massachusetts. The lawsuit claims that plaintiffs are unnecessarily segregated in nursing facilities in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C. In a motion for class certification, the plaintiffs seek to represent a class of adults with a range of disabilities who reside in nursing facilities and have not been provided certain community-based services. The Department’s brief explains that class certification is regularly granted in Olmstead cases because (1) Olmstead cases raise common questions concerning the defendant’s systemic policies and practices and (2) single injunctive relief is appropriate to remedy the unnecessary segregation of a large group of people.
On September 28, 2023, the Department of Justice filed a second Statement of Interest in Marsters, et al. v. Healey, et al. This private lawsuit was filed in the District of Massachusetts by the Massachusetts Senior Action Center and several adults with disabilities who live in nursing facilities in Massachusetts. The lawsuit claims that plaintiffs are unnecessarily segregated in nursing facilities in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C. The defendant, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, moved to dismiss the claims of the named plaintiffs, arguing that they did not have an injury in fact to support standing. The Department’s brief explains that (1) unnecessary segregation is an injury in fact that meets Article III standing requirements and (2) plaintiffs need not request and be denied a specific service to establish standing to bring a claim under Title II of the ADA.
U.S. v. Consulate Management Company III, LLC.
On August 17, 2023, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia entered into a settlement agreement with the Consulate Management Company III, LLC (CMC) pursuant to Title III of the ADA. The settlement agreement resolved a complaint that a facility managed by CMC refused to accept an individual who is deaf and uses American Sign Language (“ASL”) as her primary means of communication, into the care facility because she needed sign language interpretive services to ensure effective communication. The agreement requires the company to comply with the ADA's effective communication requirements at the facilities it manages, to have in place a system for providing qualified interpreters, training, reporting, and the payment of compensatory damages.
United States v. Alabama Department of Transportation
On November 22, 2024, the United States filed a motion for summary judgment against the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) alleging a violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The employee who was discriminated against was a transportation maintenance technician employed by ALDOT. After he injured his shoulder on the job in 2007, he returned to work with permanent impairments. After a brief retirement, the employee re-applied to ALDOT in 2017 for his same role, but he was not hired on the basis of his actual or perceived disability, violating Title I of the ADA. The United States filed a Reply to ALDOT’s Response to that motion on January 19, 2025. On December 24, 2024, the United States also filed a Response in Opposition to ALDOT’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Hawaii Department of Public Safety
On March 20, 2019, the United States entered into this Settlement Agreement with the Hawaii Department of Public Safety (HDPS) to resolve an investigation under Title II of the ADA The agreement resolves complaints alleging that HDPS excluded incarcerated individuals with mobility disabilities from participating in its furlough program because of their disabilities and that HDPS prison facilities were inaccessible to individuals with disabilities, thereby denying them equal access to prison programs, services, and activities. Under the three-year agreement, HDPS will not exclude qualified individuals with mobility disabilities from its furlough program; modify its furlough policies, practices, and procedures; make architectural modifications to five correctional facilities (Hale Nani Correctional Facility, Women’s Community Correctional Center, Halawa Correctional Facility, Waiawa Correctional Facility, and Oahu Community Correctional Center) to make them accessible to incarcerated individuals with disabilities; train staff; designate statewide and facility-specific ADA Coordinators; implement an ADA complaint procedure; and provide $45,000 in monetary damages to the complainants. On March 16, 2022 and July 17, 2023, the United States and HDPS agreed to extend the term of the agreement. The agreement expires on March 20, 2025. The extension was necessary because the global COVID-19 pandemic required HDPS to take measures to prevent and mitigate the spread of the virus within its facilities.
United States v. Florida
The United States initiated this lawsuit on July 22, 2013, following the issuance of a letter of findings in September 2012. On May 30, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida denied Florida’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, holding that the Attorney General has authority to sue to enforce Title II of the ADA. The court later dismissed the United States’ claims, concluding that the United States does not have authority to sue to enforce Title II of the ADA. The United States appealed, and on September 17, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision and judgment in favor of the United States. Florida petitioned for rehearing en banc on October 29, 2019. The Eleventh Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc on December 22, 2021, and remanded the case to the district court on January 11, 2022.
On June 15, 2022, the United States filed an Amended Complaint in this ongoing lawsuit against the State of Florida. The lawsuit alleges that, as a result of the manner in which Florida administers its service systems for children with complex medical needs, children with such disabilities are unnecessarily segregated in nursing facilities when they could be served in their family homes or other community-based settings. The lawsuit further alleges that the State’s policies and practices place children with complex medical needs who live in the community at serious risk of institutionalization in nursing facilities, in violation of Title II of the ADA. The Amended Complaint asks the court to declare that Florida is discriminating against children with complex medical needs in violation of Title II and to order the State to provide services to such children in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. On August 12, 2022, the United States filed a brief in opposition to the State of Florida's motion to dismiss. The Court denied the State's motion. On February 15 and 16, 2023, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment, and the Court granted in part and denied in part Florida's motion and denied the United States' motion. A bench trial was held from May 8 to May 19, 2023.
On July 14, 2023, after the completion of the bench trial, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled in favor of the United States. The Court's 79-page opinion explains that the State of Florida violates the rights of children with complex medical needs under Title II of the ADA by keeping some children unnecessarily institutionalized in nursing facilities, while placing other children at serious risk of unnecessary institutionalization. On the same day, the Court issued an Order of Injunction, requiring Florida to take steps to ensure that children with complex medical needs can access the services they need to live in their own homes and communities, to develop transition plans for institutionalized children, and to engage families to ensure that they can make informed choices about where their children live.
State of Nevada ex rel. Nevada Department of Corrections
On June 20, 2016, the Justice Department issued a letter of findings concluding that the Nevada Department of Corrections’ (NDOC) policies and practices for housing and employing inmates with disabilities violate Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The department found that NDOC’s discriminatory practices have resulted in the illegal segregation and stigmatization of inmates with HIV and the incarceration of inmates with disabilities for longer periods, in more restrictive settings, than inmates without disabilities.
On February 11, 2021, the Department of Justice reached an agreement to resolve its findings that NDOC unjustifiably isolated and segregated inmates with HIV, failed to keep their HIV status confidential, and denied them equal employment opportunities, including in food service positions. The agreement also resolves the department’s findings that NDOC denied inmates with disabilities—including mobility disabilities, HIV, and other physical or mental health conditions—classification and housing at lower-custody levels and facilities. At these lower-custody facilities, inmates have the opportunity to participate in various programs and gradually reintegrate back into the community as well as earn additional credits to reduce the lengths of their sentences. Under the agreement, Nevada will amend its policies, practices, and procedures, train NDOC staff and inmates on HIV and disability discrimination, designate statewide and facility-specific ADA Coordinators, and implement an ADA grievance procedure. On July 7, 2023, the Department and Nevada entered into an 18-month extension and addendum to the agreement. The extension was necessary because the global COVID-19 pandemic required Nevada to take measures to prevent and mitigate the spread of the virus within its facilities and allocate resources to its COVID-19 response.
Maryland Transit Administration
On June 29, 2023, the United States issued a Letter of Findings to the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) under Title II of the ADA, notifying MTA that its MobilityLink paratransit service violates the ADA by failing to provide paratransit services at a level of service comparable to the level of service provided to individuals who use the fixed route system. Specifically, MTA illegally subjects customers to untimely pickups and drop-offs, and lengthy waits for telephone reservation service. To remedy the violations, MTA must ensure sustained on-time performance, accurately identify and remedy service issues before they rise to the level of discriminatory capacity constraints, and plan for and provide paratransit service that is free from capacity constraints.