U.S. Department
of Justice
Disability Rights Cases
Wisconsin Department of Corrections
On September 30, 2024, the Justice Department entered into a settlement agreement under Title II of the ADA with the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (WDOC) to ensure that incarcerated individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing have equal access to WDOC’s programs, services, and activities, including educational, counseling, medical, recreational, and prison employment programs. Under the agreement, WDOC will provide inmates with hearing disabilities appropriate auxiliary aids and services, such as sign language interpreters, video telephones, visual notification systems, and hearing aids. WDOC will also develop individualized communication assessments and plans; provide training on the ADA to staff; and pay $15,000 to compensate three incarcerated individuals who were harmed.
State of Utah
On June 18, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice notified the State of Utah that it is violating the ADA’s integration mandate by failing to provide employment and day services to youth and adults and with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. The Department’s investigation revealed that Utah unnecessarily relies on segregated settings—including sheltered workshops and day facilities—to provide these services. As a result, thousands of people with I/DD in Utah spend their days separated from their communities when they could instead work paid community-based jobs and participate in community activities of their choosing. Utah’s failure to provide employment and day services in integrated settings also places other individuals with I/DD in the state, including transition age youth entering adult services, at serious risk of entering these segregated settings.
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. Frank LaRose
On June 17, 2024, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the League of Women Voters v. Frank LaRose, No. 23-cv-02414 (N.D. Ohio). Plaintiffs allege that Ohio law unlawfully restricts who may assist voters with disabilities with voting absentee in violation of Title II of the ADA, Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act, and other laws. Ohio’s law added a criminal penalty for impermissibly possessing or returning another person’s absentee ballot. The SOI confirms that Section 208 permits voters with disabilities who require assistance to receive that assistance from any person they choose, so long as that person is not an agent of the voter’s employer or union. It also affirms that Title II requires public entities provide equal opportunities to vote absentee and allows voters with disabilities to use an assistor of their choice as a reasonable modification.
State of Nebraska
On May 14, 2024, the United States sent a letter of findings to the State of Nebraska, notifying the State that it is unnecessarily segregating people with serious mental illness (SMI) in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Following an investigation into Nebraska's behavioral health service system, the Department of Justice concluded that Nebraska fails to provide its citizens with SMI with the services they need to live and work in their homes and communities. As a result, Nebraskans with SMI often have no options other moving into assisted living facilities and spending their days in segregated day programs with no path to employment.
United States v. West Memphis School District
On April 8, 2024, the United States filed a lawsuit against the West Memphis School District in Arkansas alleging the school district denied an employee with a disability temporary telework as a reasonable accommodation in violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The lawsuit also alleges that the school district denied the accommodation request without discussing it, or possible alternative accommodations, with the employee. As a result of the denial, the employee was forced to resign.
City of Miami Beach
On January 3, 2024, the United States executed a settlement agreement with the city of Miami Beach to resolve its claims that the city violated Title I of the ADA by asking police applicants to take medical and psychological exams too early in the hiring process. Under the agreement, the city will ensure that its hiring practices comply with the ADA, including the timing of medical examinations, and will train its employees on this requirement. When requested, the city will provide an applicant whose conditional job offer is revoked with the reason why, including any medical or disability-related reasons. The city will also host a training on the ADA and best practices for background investigations for representatives from Florida’s municipal and county law enforcement agencies.
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.
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.
United States v. Alabama Department of Transportation
On July 31, 2023, the United States filed a lawsuit against the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) alleging a violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The lawsuit alleges that ALDOT refused to hire an applicant because of his physical disability that results in a lifting restriction. The applicant's disability stems from an injury he experienced on the job, and for many years after that injury he worked for ALDOT successfully with accommodations. However, when the applicant reapplied after a brief retirement, ALDOT refused to hire him because of his disability. The complaint also alleges that ALDOT used selection criteria that screened out the applicant because of his disability that were not job-related or consistent with business necessity.
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.
United States v. Cumberland County, Tennessee
On January 18, 2023, the United States filed its Complaint and proposed Consent Decree to resolve allegations that Cumberland County, Tennessee violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act by denying a corrections officer a reasonable accommodation and constructively discharging/terminating him based on his disability of opioid use disorder. In addition, the County implemented a policy that prevents people who are taking legally prescribed controlled substances or certain medications from having those substances or medications present in their system while at work for the County, thus prohibiting working for the County while taking such medications. Under the Consent Decree, Cumberland County will implement non-discrimination policies and procedures, train its staff on the ADA, and pay a total of $160,000 to the complainant.
U.S. v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
On December 22, 2022, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit and the parties entered a consent decree in this suit against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) challenging its failure to reasonably accommodate a correctional officer with diabetes under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, alleges that ODRC unlawfully failed to provide the correction officer with a day shift to accommodate his diabetes where it was medically necessary to do so. Under the decree, ODRC will revise its policies and procedures as needed to ensure ADA compliance; provide ADA employment training to employees who make personnel decisions; and report to the United States on its compliance. ODRC will also pay $50,000 in damages to the complainant and provide him with a day shift as a reasonable accommodation for his diabetes unless if become an undue hardship to do so.