1999 US Supreme Court Decision Olmstead vs. LC/EW

Supreme Court Upholds ADA 'Integration Mandate' in Olmstead decision

On June 22, 1999 in Washington, DC the Supreme Court affirmed the right of individuals with disabilities to live in the community. In its 6-3 ruling against the state of Georgia in the case Olmstead v. L.C and E.W., said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, delivering the opinion of the court, "states are required to place persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than in institutions when the State¹s treatment professionals have determined that community placement is appropriate, the transfer from institutional care to a less restrictive setting is not opposed by the affected individual, and the placement can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the State and the needs of others with mental disabilities. "

Under Title II of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, public agencies are to provide services "in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities." The high court upheld the 'integration mandate,' ruling that Georgia's department of human resources could not segregate people with mental disabilities in a state psychiatric hospital long after the agency's own treatment professionals had recommended their transfer to community care.

The lower courts ruled the state violated the ADA's "integration mandate." Georgia appealed, claiming the ruling could lead to the closing of all state hospitals and disruption of state funding of services to people with mental disabilities. However, disability organizations and others, including the U.S. solicitor general, who said "The unjustified segregation of people in institutions, when community placement is appropriate, constitutes a form of discrimination prohibited by Title II [of the ADA]" rallied behind the women.

Originally, 26 states had signed onto an Amicus Brief in support of Georgia's position. However, an extensive education campaign by disability rights groups reduced that number to just seven before the filing. The Olmstead ruling provided an important clarification as to how states should comply with Title II of the ADA. The ADA applies to all public bodies and to the use of public funds and therefore has implications for publicly-funded Medicaid services for people with disabilities. The Olmstead decision confirmed that states must ensure that Medicaid-eligible persons do not experience discrimination by being institutionalized when they could be served in a more integrated social community setting. This important decision has laid the foundation for people with disabillities to sue for discrimination and impingement of their civil rights in states where people have been put at risk due to a lack of community-based services.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• ADAPT
• EndeavorFreedom.TV
• disability

[johnnycr57]

The Kansas politicians must have been on vacation when that decision was made. Persons with disabilities are doomed in Kansas.

[EndeavorFreedom]

Watch the other Olmstead pieces, they inform you on how to file a lawsuit using the Olmstead decision as a basis for a civil rights lawsuit with either an advocacy office or the Office of Civil Rights.

[wheelslarbac]

@erinecfl did you finally get your massage theapy

state license? or are you still denied it due to your

disability?

[erinecfl]

I've spent a year trying to get my state license for massage therapy. I was denied it due to my disability, although I passed the exam (National Certification) & was a top student in my class. I've written to the EEOC, Civil Rights Org., Florida Comm. on Human Relations, the Attorney General, Gov. of Florida & hundreds more. Although the US passed discrimination Laws, they do not hold states or gov. entities accountable for violating these laws or responsible for enforcing them.