President Bush Signs Act Broadening ADA Protections for Employees and Job Applicants

By
September 28, 2008

Congress previously gave approval to a major civil rights bill expanding protections for people with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The bill proposed sweeping amendments to the ADA in a number of aspects to overturn several recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions. President Bush signed the proposed ADA amendments into law on September 25, 2008. The amendments are effective January 1, 2009.

Currently, a physical impairment constitutes a disability covered by the ADA protections if it substantially limits a major life activity. The U.S. Supreme Court found that individuals with medical conditions that are controlled by medication or other methods do not qualify for protection under the ADA as having a condition which substantially limits a major life activity and thus were excluded from ADA protection. In a Texas case, for example, a federal judge said a worker with epilepsy was not disabled because he was taking medications that reduced his seizures. Those in support of the ADA amendments said that people with epilepsy, diabetes, cancer, multiple sclerosis and other ailments should not be denied ADA protection simply because their conditions can be controlled by medications or other measures. The ADA amendments address these and other issues.
 
The ADA amendments leave the current definition of disability intact, but add definitions of substantially limits and major life activity. Courts are instructed that the question of whether an individual s impairment is a disability under the ADA should not demand extensive analysis.
 
The ADA amendments override the U.S. Supreme Court s unanimous ruling in Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002) in which it defined a disability that substantially limits a major life activity. In Toyota, the Court ruled that the terms substantially and major need to be interpreted strictly to create a demanding standard for qualifying as disabled. In an effort to clarify the intent of Congress, the ADA amendments state: The definition of disability in this act shall be construed in favor of broad coverage.
 
The ADA amendments also override the U.S. Supreme Court s ruling in Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471 (1999). In that case, the Court ruled: (1) mitigating measures (e.g. medication) that may prevent a substantial limitation should be taken into account; and that (2) the ADA s protection of individuals who are regarded as having a disability applies only where the individual is regarded as having an impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. Under the ADA amendments, an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active, and an individual is regarded as having such an impairment if he or she has been subjected to a prohibited action because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity. In deciding whether a person is disabled, the ADA amendments state that the courts should not consider the effects of mitigating measures, like prescription drugs, hearing aids and artificial limbs.
 
The ADA amendments also make conforming amendments to the definition of disability under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Section 504 of that Act prohibits discrimination in any federally funded program on the basis of an individual s disability.
The ADA amendments will have a substantial impact on whether a medical condition constitutes a disability within the meaning of the ADA. Conditions not previously ADA protected may now be ADA protected. Human resource professionals should become knowledgeable of the changes to the ADA to better ensure that all medical conditions which qualify as ADA disabilities can be identified. ADA and reasonable accommodation policies should also be reviewed and updated to ensure compliance with the ADA, as now amended.
If you have questions regarding the above, please contact any of the attorneys in the Employment, Benefits & Labor Relations Practice Group of Ruder Ware.

Back to all News & Insights

This document provides information of a general nature regarding legislative or other legal developments, and is based on the state of the law at the time of the original publication of this article. None of the information contained herein is intended as legal advice or opinion relative to specific matters, facts, situations, or issues, and additional facts and information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed. You should not act upon the information in this document without discussing your specific situation with legal counsel.

© 2024 Ruder Ware, L.L.S.C. Accurate reproduction with acknowledgment granted. All rights reserved.