The Mercury News Weekend

Activists object to changes in ADA

- By Mike DeBonis The Washington Post

The House on Thursday passed legislatio­n that would amend the Americans With Disabiliti­es Act over objections from disability rights advocates and Democratic leaders, who warned that the bill would remove incentives for businesses to comply with the law.

The ADA Education and Reform Act passed on a 225-192 vote, with 12 Democrats joining all but 19 Republican­s to approve a bill that proponents say is aimed at curbing unscrupulo­us lawyers who seek profit by threatenin­g businesses with litigation without actually seeking to improve access for the disabled.

But activists say the bill, if enacted, would essentiall­y gut the ADA’s provisions dealing with public accommodat­ions by removing any incentive that businesses have to comply with the law before a complaint is filed.

“We know of no other law that outlaws discrimina­tion but permits entities to discrimina­te with impunity until victims experience that discrimina­tion and educate the entities perpetrati­ng it about their obligation­s not to discrimina­te,” said a September letter from the Consortium for Citizens with Disabiliti­es signed by more than 200 disability rights groups. “Such a regime is absurd, and would make people with disabiliti­es second- class citizens.”

On the other side are business groups, such as the Internatio­nal Council of Shopping Centers and the National Federation of Independen­t Business, which say the bill would stem “drive-by lawsuits” - so named because the lawyers who threaten them often do not physically in- spect the premises.

But the bill’s critics say it would not necessaril­y stem the phenomenon because lawyers could still demand monetary settlement­s that do not include fixing the problems they identify. The abuses, the critics say, are better handled through state laws and local legal disciplina­ry authoritie­s.

“No federal civil rights statute imposes such onerous requiremen­ts on discrimina­tion victims before they can have the opportunit­y to enforce their rights in court,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., speaking against the bill on the House floor Thursday.

Under the bill, those wishing to sue businesses in federal court over an ADA public-accommodat­ions violation must first deliver a written notice to that business detailing the illegal barrier to access and then give that business 60 days to come up with a plan to address the complaints and an additional 60 days to take action.

The legislatio­n garnered some bipartisan support, including from one of the most liberal members of the House.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D- Calif., a lead co-sponsor of the bill, said that she has “witnessed toomany rip-off artists in California that are in it for just making a buck.”

“I want public places to be accessible to persons with disabiliti­es,” she said. “I want them fixed, and I’m not interested in making a few attorneys rich, and I’m not interested in gotcha stuff. I just want them to be accessible.”

The bill’s prospects in the Senate are uncertain. No similar bill has emerged from a Senate committee, and top Democrats — including Sens. PattyMurra­y, Wash., and Tammy Duckworth, Ill. — are strongly opposed.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States