Justice Department Rollback of ADA Guidelines Sparks Concern Among Disability Advocates
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has ignited a wave of concern and criticism from disability advocacy groups with its recent decision to remove 11 guidelines designed to assist businesses in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The DOJ claims that these guidelines were "unnecessary and outdated" and their removal will streamline compliance with the federal disability law, eliminating what they consider unnecessary review. This move is attributed to a January 20th executive order signed by former President Donald Trump, which directed federal agencies to reduce the cost of living by eliminating burdensome regulations.
The ADA, enacted in 1990, is a landmark piece of legislation that extends civil rights protections to an estimated one in four U.S. adults with disabilities. Over the years, rules and guidance have been added to the ADA to clarify and specify protections for individuals with disabilities, including during the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Advocacy groups, however, are voicing serious concerns that this rollback of guidelines could weaken the protections afforded to people with disabilities under the ADA. The American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) has expressed that the DOJ’s action eliminates protections that are both "necessary and timely," indicating a strong disagreement with the department’s assessment.
The specific guidelines removed by the DOJ fall into several categories. Notably, five of the eleven guidelines were enacted in 2021, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. These included guidance on masking, which was once recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as a crucial measure to mitigate the spread of the virus. The DOJ also removed clarifications regarding protections for people with disabilities in outdoor restaurant seating areas, commonly known as "streateries," as well as guidance for employers concerning employees with disabilities during the pandemic.
The AAPD argues that even though the height of the pandemic has passed, COVID-19 continues to pose a significant threat to public health. They emphasize that COVID-19, along with related conditions like long COVID, continues to cause disabilities on a daily basis. Furthermore, the AAPD highlights that streateries, which originated during the pandemic, persist and create accessibility challenges for people with disabilities navigating public rights-of-way.
Beyond the COVID-19-related guidelines, the DOJ also rescinded provisions related to the rights of individuals with disabilities to use service animals and the right to have visitors at hospitals or medical facilities. These provisions were initially adopted in 2021 when COVID-19 was widespread and hospitals implemented restrictions to control transmission.
Further, the agency eliminated three guidelines pertaining to the ADA requirements for expanding businesses. These guidelines included language related to maintaining accessible features, seeking input from customers with disabilities, and implementing accessible customer service practices for hotel and lodging guests.
The final three excised regulations addressed outreach to customers with disabilities, assistance at self-serve gas stations, and the steps lodging facilities must take to comply with the disabilities law.
While the five guidelines were pandemic-related, the remaining six were initially added to the ADA.gov website between 1999 and 2009, spanning both Democratic and Republican administrations. This fact raises questions about the DOJ’s characterization of these guidelines as universally "outdated" and "unnecessary."
In conjunction with the elimination of these guidelines, the DOJ has emphasized the availability of tax incentives for businesses to offset the costs of making improvements for customers or workers with disabilities. Mac Warner, a deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s civil rights division, stated that the agency wants businesses and the public to fully understand their rights and obligations under the ADA.
Warner further added that "putting money back into the pockets of business owners helps everyone by allowing those businesses to pass on cost savings to consumers and bolster the economy." This statement suggests that the DOJ views the removal of these guidelines as a way to reduce regulatory burdens on businesses and stimulate economic growth.
However, critics argue that the cost savings for businesses may come at the expense of accessibility and equal access for individuals with disabilities. They contend that the guidelines provided valuable clarification and practical guidance for businesses striving to comply with the ADA, and their removal could lead to confusion, reduced accessibility, and potential discrimination.
It is important to note that former President Trump’s executive order, which served as the basis for the DOJ’s action, did not specifically mention the Americans with Disabilities Act. The order primarily targeted energy regulations, which Trump argued led to higher costs for Americans. He also asserted that regulatory requirements contributed to higher housing costs.
Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates the significance of the ADA’s protections. A 2022 CDC survey estimated that over 70 million U.S. adults had a disability. Nearly 44% of adults aged 65 and older had a disability, and people with disabilities were found to be more likely to experience the effects of long COVID.
The AAPD has emphasized that people with disabilities frequently encounter barriers in retail, lodging, and healthcare settings. The organization argues that "individuals, employers, and other entities still need this guidance and still benefit from it." This statement underscores the ongoing need for clear and comprehensive guidance to ensure that the ADA is effectively implemented and that people with disabilities are afforded equal opportunities and access.
The DOJ’s decision to remove these 11 ADA guidelines has sparked a complex debate about the balance between regulatory burden and the protection of civil rights for people with disabilities. While the DOJ argues that these changes will simplify compliance and reduce costs for businesses, disability advocates worry that the rollback could erode important protections and create new barriers for individuals with disabilities. The long-term impact of this decision remains to be seen.
