Recently expelled from privately owned and operated New Hampton School, parents of a 15 year old girl are fighting the expulsion based on the grounds of the Americans with Disabilities Act. While the new ADA Amendments Act do not go into effect until January 1, 2009 the parents are wishing to have either the expulsion overturned or a prorated refund given to the parents.

The eating disorder of the girl, anorexia, was cited as a disability under the ADA which maintains three requirements to be covered:

  1. Whether she has an impairment
  2. Whether that impairment affects a “major life activity”
  3. Whether the impact was substantial

Under the most recent rulings of the Supreme Court regarding disability cases and the ADA, the Supreme Court has ruled to narrowly interpret the meaning of impairment and disabilities. It would also seem that precedents would have been already set under the current interpretation of the law; however, these interpretations surely will change come January 1, 2009 when the ADA Amendments Act goes into effect.

Read the whole story here: Mother fights private school expulsion with lawsuit



The public schools and technology center of Norman, Oklahoma are prepared for when the new regulations for the Americans with Disabilities Act go into effect on January 1, 2009.  While the definition of “disability” hasn’t changed that much within the amended act, it will have a more significant impact on the employers of the school districts than it will on the students.

Moore Norman Technology Center (MNTC) recently hired a disability coordinator whose duties include facilitating communications regarding disabilities between MNTC and its partner schools around the area, as well as ensuring all educational requirements are met for the 100 or so students with disabilities.  Prior to being hired as MNTC’s disability coordinator, Sande Johnson was a special education teacher on top of holding a bachelor of science degree in elementary education and a master’s degree in special education.

Read the whole Norman Transcript story here:  Disability series: Schools ready for new law



I recently stumbled upon three articles written on NWI.com written by James Jorgensen to show the differences between the current ADA and the ADA Amendments Act which is slated to take effect January 1, 2009. The series looks at cases which cite the ADA’s protections and look at the outcomes of such deciding cases. While these cases are not making it to the Supreme Court (yet), they soon may be. The author examines three cases which in its rulings have affected the employer/employee relationship and looks at how they will be interpreted under the new law come January 1, 2009.

The first article lets readers know that (pre-Jan 1, 2009) disability must be taken with regard to “mitigating measures.” “Mitigating measures” are the measures taken to reduce the affect of a disability, such as: medication for blood pressure, prosthetics and assisted technologies. It also brings a case about a man with Cerebral Palsy who obtained employment as a pharmacy assistant and to make a long story short (read the article) the man ultimately sued his employer for not accommodating his disability.

The second article mainly finishes up where the first one left off (”Stay tuned to find out how this case was decided”) and initiates a new case, one being about a university professor with agoraphobia (fear of being in wide open spaces) who needed accommodations by the campus to only work four days a week, then three and ultimately sued because when he needed more accommodations, the university terminated him.

While the articles are not substantially filled with all of the technical aspects, at times glossing over the details which readers want, the main points are hit.  As the writer practices law, we would like him to discuss in a bit more detail and potentially examine both sides’ arguments to give the reader the full picture of the case.

The published articles can be seen here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3



A local CBS subsidiary wrote the two Presidential hopefuls, McCain and Obama asking them how they would address issues surrounding people with disabilities.  These questions included issues of housing, mental health, health care, employment and discrimination.  The candidates were asked to respond in writing to the questions with their positions and stances on the issues.

The two camps did respond to the questions but really didn’t answer as in-depth as one would assume.  When the two were asked about issues, they both responded with things they have done, not things they will do as President.  It’s great that both candidates have done things in the past, but those are in the past and we’re forging ahead into the future.

(more…)



The new law, signed today, broadens the protections of the original Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Through court cases since the original bill’s enactment, the law has been narrowly interpreted and has refused coverage to many Americans it was designed to protect.

The ADA Amendments Act is designed to force the courts into a loose interpretation of the definition of disability, making it clear Congress’ intent coverage to anyone facing disability discrimination.



ADA Watch/National Coalition for Disability Rights
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 900S
Washington, DC 20004

Media Contact:
Jim Ward, Founder and President

(Washington, DC) The leaders of a national coalition of disability, civil rights and social justice organizations praised the U.S. Senate today for taking bipartisan action to restore vital civil rights protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In recent years, the ADA – the world’s first human rights law for people with disabilities – has been dramatically narrowed in the courts leaving citizens with epilepsy, diabetes, mental illness, HIV/AIDS and other disabilities unprotected from discrimination. The ADA Amendments Act clarifies the intent of Congress and reverses the “judicial activism” that has resulted in more than 90% of employment-related ADA cases being dismissed on summary judgment.

(more…)





World Institute on Disability