Just because you have Cerebral Palsy doesn’t mean you have disability.

The same goes for all of you with diabetes, cancer, hearing loss, depression, multiple sclerosis, and a multitude of other “conditions” you and I consider to be disabilities. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court doesn’t agree with you and me and it doesn’t believe that anything is inherently a disability.

Congress had sought to put a sweeping end to discrimination against people with disabilities with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990. The ADA was hailed as landmark legislation affording protections to some 43,000,000 (in 1990, many more now) people with disabilities. Over the last 18 years, the cloak of protection afforded by the ADA has been systematically weathered by court cases eroding the original and comprehensive intent of the ADA. Advocates, scholars, politicians, and individuals alike have recognized the narrowing of the scope of the ADA and are proposing a legislative fix. The ADA Restoration Act aims to be that legislative solution.

Cases such as Sutton v United Airlines, Inc and Bragdon v Abbott impose standards quantifying disability and in general have limited the definition of disability. The consequence of these and other decisions is that in some cases ADA protections are not applicable to individuals with disabilities if corrective measures are applied. Corrective measures are items that are used to alleviate the physical or mental impairment of the individual with a disability. If these corrective measures are taken into consideration when determining disability, then a diabetic who uses insulin, an amputee who wears a prosthetic, or an individual who is hard of hearing and uses a hearing aid would not be considered to have a disability and therefore would not be protected under the ADA. Your employer could conceivably fire you due to your disability, but the court rule that you were not actually disabled, and therefore firing you was legal.

In Furnish v SVI Systems, Inc, the Seventh Circuit Court determined that an employee with chronic Hepatitis B was not disabled because “although liver function is ‘integral to one’s daily existence’ in that one needs a healthy liver to remove toxins from the blood, liver function is not ‘integral to one’s daily existence’ under Bragdon…” In other words, the court’s decision stated that the function of a major bodily organ did not qualify as a major life activity. This interpretation leaves one to ask how it is possible for the function of a major organ not to correlate to a major life activity. It would only make sense that being able to breathe, have a heart beat, and process toxins from the body would be considered major life activities.

The Americans with Disabilities Act Restoration Act aims to rightfully restore what the ADA intended for equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for everyone. These are ideals that everyone should be able to enjoy – plain and simple. Deleting specific references such as “substantial limits” and redefining terms such as “major life activity” would eliminate the loopholes left open in the wording of the ADA, and remove the ability of courts, high and low, to misinterpret what Congress originally intended. The ADA Restoration Act would correct the definitions of disability and again protection to those that have been unfairly and unjustly cut off.

The purpose of the ADA was to combat widespread discrimination against individuals with disabilities. The original bi-partisan efforts seemed almost simplistic in nature because (almost!) everyone agreed that people with disabilities shouldn’t have to face continued discrimination based on their disability. Unfortunately the decisions of the US Supreme Court have narrowed the definition of disability and consequently left many struggling to obtain the protections which Congress had intended from the beginning.

Discrimination against individuals with disabilities still persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services.

As an advocate in the disability community, I am very proud of the accomplishments that we have made, but more importantly, we need to look ahead at how much more still needs to be done. The ADA Restoration Act is another milestone in the path to equality and civil liberties for all our brothers and sisters with disabilities.