On September 12, 2024, the United States filed a Complaint against Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation under Title III of the ADA. The complaint alleges that Johns Hopkins denied individuals with disabilities equal access to medical care by excluding their necessary support persons (such as a family member, personal assistant, or other individual knowledgeable about them). As a result, these patients were unable to receive equal care. These patients had disabilities such as dementia, autism spectrum disorder, intellectual and developmental disabilities, and mental health disabilities.
On September 12, 2024, the United States simultaneously filed a proposed Consent Decree to resolve the allegations of the Complaint. Under the proposed consent decree, which the court must approve, Johns Hopkins has agreed to pay $150,000 to compensate multiple affected individuals. Johns Hopkins will also update its support person policies to ensure ADA compliance, train its employees on its support person policies and the ADA, and report to the department on any future complaints regarding support persons.
Federal Court: Maryland, District of Case Documents: Complaint , Consent Decree - Johns Hopkins Health SystemOn July 30, 2024, the U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO) for the Middle District of Tennessee reached an agreement under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with Good Times Restaurants, Inc., to address the discriminatory treatment of a group of children with disabilities who use wheelchairs for mobility, at one of its Bad Daddy's Burger Bar restaurant locations in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Under the terms of the agreement, Good Times will pay a total of $352,000 in damages and civil penalties to resolve the USAO's investigation of the exclusion of a youth wheelchair basketball team and their families from its restaurant over concerns that the wheelchairs presented a fire hazard. In addition to the damages and civil penalties, Good Times is implementing a non-discrimination policy and implementing training.
Case Document: Settlement/Consent DecreeOn 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.
Case Document: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of LawOn 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.
Federal Court: Ohio, Northern District Case Document: Statement of InterestOn June 17, 2024, the Department of Justice issued a letter of findings that Alaska violated Title II of the ADA by denying voters with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in the voting process, failed to provide an accessible ballot for in-person voting, selected inaccessible polling places for federal, state, and local elections, and maintained an inaccessible elections website.
Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Findings of Fact and Conclusions of LawOn June 14, 2024, the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas secured settlement agreements with four Texas counties--Colorado, Runnels, Smith, and Upton--to resolve the Department's findings that the Counties violated Title II of the ADA by maintaining election websites that discriminate against individuals with vision or manual disabilities. The websites provide essential voting information and registration requirements. Under the settlement agreements, the counties agreed to make all future and existing online election content accessible to people with disabilities. The counties also agreed to hire an independent auditor to evaluate the accessibility of their election websites’ content, provide notice to visitors and users of the websites to solicit comments and requests about any accessibility barriers, designate an employee to coordinate its efforts, revise its procedures, and train relevant personnel.
Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Settlement/Consent DecreeOn June 14, 2024, the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas secured settlement agreements with four Texas counties--Colorado, Runnels, Smith, and Upton--to resolve the Department's findings that the Counties violated Title II of the ADA by maintaining election websites that discriminate against individuals with vision or manual disabilities. The websites provide essential voting information and registration requirements. Under the settlement agreements, the counties agreed to make all future and existing online election content accessible to people with disabilities. The counties also agreed to hire an independent auditor to evaluate the accessibility of their election websites’ content, provide notice to visitors and users of the websites to solicit comments and requests about any accessibility barriers, designate an employee to coordinate its efforts, revise its procedures, and train relevant personnel.
Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Settlement/Consent DecreeOn June 14, 2024, the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas secured settlement agreements with four Texas counties--Colorado, Runnels, Smith, and Upton--to resolve the Department's findings that the Counties violated Title II of the ADA by maintaining election websites that discriminate against individuals with vision or manual disabilities. The websites provide essential voting information and registration requirements. Under the settlement agreements, the counties agreed to make all future and existing online election content accessible to people with disabilities. The counties also agreed to hire an independent auditor to evaluate the accessibility of their election websites’ content, provide notice to visitors and users of the websites to solicit comments and requests about any accessibility barriers, designate an employee to coordinate its efforts, revise its procedures, and train relevant personnel.
Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Settlement/Consent DecreeOn June 14, 2024, the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas secured settlement agreements with four Texas counties--Colorado, Runnels, Smith, and Upton--to resolve the Department's findings that the Counties violated Title II of the ADA by maintaining election websites that discriminate against individuals with vision or manual disabilities. The websites provide essential voting information and registration requirements. Under the settlement agreements, the counties agreed to make all future and existing online election content accessible to people with disabilities. The counties also agreed to hire an independent auditor to evaluate the accessibility of their election websites’ content, provide notice to visitors and users of the websites to solicit comments and requests about any accessibility barriers, designate an employee to coordinate its efforts, revise its procedures, and train relevant personnel.
Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Settlement/Consent DecreeOn June 3, 2024, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado reached an agreement under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with Marriott International, Inc., to address barriers to making reservations for accessible rooms at Marriott-branded hotels across the United States. Under the terms of the agreement, Marriott will make improvements to its reservation processes to make it easier for individuals with disabilities to reserve accessible hotel rooms, including requiring that all Marriott-branded hotels accurately list their accessible-room inventory on Marriott’s centralized electronic reservations system, list accessible rooms in a single location on each hotel's website, make accessible-rooms available to the major third-party hotel reservations websites, make additional accessible rooms available for reservation using Marriott’s Bonvoy rewards-points system, train its call-center employees on the procedure for handling requests for accessible-room reservations, track complaints from guests about issues relating to reserving accessible rooms, and require Marriott-branded hotels to report whether they are in compliance with the minimum number of accessible rooms required by the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Marriott will also pay a $50,000 civil penalty.
Case Document: Settlement/Consent DecreeOn November 7, 2023, the United States issued a letter of findings concluding that the City of Anoka, Minnesota, violated Title II of the ADA and the Fair Housing Act by denying tenants with mental health disabilities an equal opportunity to receive emergency assistance. The City, through enforcement of its so-called “crime free” housing ordinance and by sharing confidential medical information relating to calls for emergency service with all landlords, deterred individuals with mental health disabilities and those associated with them from calling for emergency help and threatened their current housing or future housing prospects.
On May 21, 2024, the United States filed a complaint and the parties entered a proposed consent decree to resolve its findings. Under the proposed consent decree, the City has agreed to pay $175,000 to compensate harmed individuals; end its practice of publicizing the disability, medical, and health information of individuals with mental health disabilities; adopt non-discrimination policies and complaint procedures; notify landlords, property owners, and tenants of changes to the program; designate an ADA coordinator; train staff; and report to the United States.
Federal Court: Minnesota, District of Case Documents: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , Settlement/Consent Decree , ComplaintOn May 22, 2024, the United States filed its Opposition Brief in response to Defendant State and TBI's Motion to Dismiss. The United States' brief argues that (1) the United States may enforce Title II, and Defendants’ interpretation disregards the remedies Congress incorporated into Title II; (2) the breadth of Title II’s coverage encompasses Tennessee’s implementation and enforcement of its aggravated prostitution statute; (3) Tennessee and the TBI are proper defendants to this suit; and (4) any arguments about the scope of the relief are improper at the motion to dismiss.
On May 16, 2024, the United States entered into a settlement agreement with the Shelby County District Attorney General's Office (DA). The DA has agreed not to prosecute individuals living with HIV under Tennessee’s aggravated prostitution law. The DA will also adopt reforms to correct discrimination against people living with HIV who were subjected to harsher penalties under the law. The aggravated prostitution statute elevates what would otherwise be misdemeanor conduct to a felony because the individual has HIV, regardless of any actual risk of harm. Aggravated prostitution is also categorized as a “violent sexual offense” mandating registration as a sex offender, in most cases for life.
On February 15, 2024, the United States filed a complaint against the State of Tennessee and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) for violating Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint alleges that the State and the TBI subject people to harsher criminal penalties solely because of their human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status by maintaining and enforcing Tennessee’s aggravated prostitution statute.
On December 1, 2023, the United States issued a letter of findings to the State, the TBI, and the Shelby County District Attorney’s Office notifying them that they violated the ADA by maintaining and enforcing the state’s aggravated prostitution statute. That letter of findings asked the State, the TBI, and the Shelby County District Attorney’s Office to stop enforcing the aggravated prostitution law, to remove affected individuals from the registry, and to take other measures to redress the discrimination.