Talk About Sexual Violence: Phase Two Final Report

/in , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

After the release of videos and other materials created for the Talk About Sexual Violence project in 2017—which focused on women with intellectual/developmental disabilities (IDD) who experience sexual violence—the project team was approached by males with IDD who are survivors of sexual assault about crimes perpetrated against them. People with IDD report that many health care providers are uneducated about how to interact with patients with disabilities and don’t know about their high risk of sexual violence. The problem is exacerbated when society leads men to believe that rape and sexual assault only happen to women, when in fact men, and especially men with IDD, are victimized at alarmingly high rates.

For this reason, in 2018 Talk About Sexual Violence turned its attention to specific challenges men with disabilities experience. It is critical that health care professionals and their patients talk openly about sexual violence prevention. Talk About Sexual Violence provides tools that help create a safe place to have these conversations.

Community for Permanent Supported Housing et al. v. Housing Authority of the City of Dallas

/in , , , , , /by Pam Katz

State: Texas

Filed: October 9, 2019

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Overview: The Arc filed an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs’ appeal of the district court’s dismissal on ripeness grounds. The case, filed in federal district court in the Northern District of Texas in 2018, challenges the Housing Authority of the City of Dallas’s (DHA) refusal to use the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Project-Based Voucher (PBV) rent subsidy program to provide otherwise scarce affordable, independent housing opportunities for people with IDD in the community. DHA was poised to offer such PBVs—each of which would permit a single-family house to be rented at subsidized rates to several people with IDD who can live independently with appropriate supports—but then canceled its offering and has refused to offer any substitute, without any good reason. The lawsuit alleges that DHA’s actions violate the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Fair Housing Act, and state law. The district court dismissed the case in April 2019 and Plaintiffs appealed to the Fifth Circuit. The amicus brief supports Plaintiffs’ request to reverse the district court’s dismissal order and let the case move forward and explains that DHA’s ongoing failure to provide access to its program (including through reasonable accommodations where necessary) deprives adults with IDD of a critical opportunity to live in the most integrated setting appropriate in the community and creates an acute risk of homelessness and institutionalization.

Excerpt: “Title II of the ADA requires public entities to administer programs in the ‘most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities,’ and Olmstead is noteworthy for its broad recognition of the rights of people with disabilities to live and receive needed services and supports in the community—as opposed to institutional settings—which has become known as the ‘integration mandate’ of the ADA. But this mandate—which also protects those who are “at risk” of institutionalization—cannot be fully realized without affordable housing opportunities in the community that are accessible to people with IDD and enable them to live outside their family homes. For many adults with IDD currently living in their family homes, opportunities that allow them to live in the community separate from their families are often preferable because these opportunities provide greater independence and autonomy. Additionally, living in the community separate from their families can be critical for adults with IDD to avoid homelessness or institutionalization when a supporting family member inevitably ages and reaches a point where she or he can no longer provide shelter or support.”

Case Documents

Amicus Brief: Community for Permanent Supported Housing et al. v. Housing Authority of the City of Dallas

Related Media

Press Release: “The Arc and Partners File Amicus Brief Challenging Discriminatory Actions of Dallas Housing Authority”
Relman Colfax: “Settlement Results in More Community-Based Housing for People with Disabilities in North Texas“

Jenkins v. Alabama

/in , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

State: Alabama

Filed: September 27, 2019

Court: Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Overview: The brief argued that Marc Jenkins, an individual with evidence indicating possible intellectual disability on death row in Alabama, should have the opportunity to present full evidence to prove his intellectual disability claim in an Atkins hearing.

Excerpt: “A death row inmate who claims that he has intellectual disability and therefore is exempt from execution under the Eighth Amendment, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), should have the opportunity to develop an appropriate record in support of that claim when there is evidence of impairment that could be attributable to intellectual disability. That common-sense rule is grounded in principles of due process and fundamental fairness, taking into account the way Atkins fundamentally changed the legal context of intellectual disability evidence in capital cases. It also is grounded in clinical standards regarding the diagnosis of intellectual disability, which emphasize the importance of thorough evidence-gathering and clinical judgment.”

Case Documents

Amicus Brief: Jenkins v. Alabama

Public Charge Amicus Briefs

/in , , , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

States: California, Washington, New York, Illinois

Filed: 2019

Courts: Northern District of California, Southern District of New York, Eastern District of Washington, Northern District of Illinois

Overview: A coalition of national disability advocacy groups filed four amicus briefs in support of litigation to stop the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from implementing its new “public charge” rule. Twenty-one states–led by California, Washington, and New York–as well as Cook County, Illinois, have filed cases against the Trump Administration to block the new rule. The advocacy groups – representing tens of thousands of people with disabilities and their families across the country – claim that the new public charge rule will prevent people with disabilities from entering this country or becoming legal residents in violation of federal disability law.

Case Documents

Briefs:
California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (District Court)
New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (District Court) 
Washington v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (District Court)
Cook County, Illinois v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (District Court)
California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Ninth Circuit)
New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Second Circuit)
Washington v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Ninth Circuit)
Cook County, Illinois v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Seventh Circuit)

Decisions:

California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Cook County, IL v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Washington v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Related Media

Press Release: The Arc Applauds Federal Injunctions Against Public Charge Rule

Press Release: Disability Advocacy Groups File Amicus Brief Opposing the Administration’s Public Charge Rule as Illegal Disability Discrimination

Press Release: Supreme Court Lifts Stay on Public Charge Rule: Implementation Will Have Chilling Impact on People with Disabilities

The Hill: Disability rights groups join challenge to ‘public charge’ rule

Why Does Life in the Community Matter to People With Disabilities?

/in , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

Everyone deserves to live in their communities with the right supports, but limited funding often leads to waitlists for necessary community-based services. Hear from people with intellectual and developmental disabilities about what life in the community means to them. Join The Arc today to fight for better funding! Sign up to take action: https://bit.ly/2KY5QRi

Deinstitutionalization: Join The Arc in Fighting for Life in the Community

/in , , , , , /by Pam Katz

Did you know that 37 states still have institutions where people with disabilities live segregated lives? Institutions limit people’s lives and choices, and they must be closed. But more than that, communities need the resources currently utilized in institutions for all people with disabilities to live independently with the right supports, no matter their level of need.

The Direct Support Professional Crisis

/in , , , , , /by Pam Katz

Many people with intellectual and developmental disabilities rely on direct support professionals (DSPs) to lead full and independent lives in their communities. The work DSPs do is vital, but due to years of systemic-failures, they’re often underpaid leading to vacancies and high turnover. It’s a crisis that affects people with disabilities and their families every day. DSPs and people with disabilities deserve more.

Undisclosed Podcast: State v. Rocky Myers – Episode 4: Of Mice and Men

/in , , , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

Through a review of Rocky Myers’ case in Alabama and a discussion with The Arc’s legal director, this episode explores the Supreme Court’s opinion in Atkins and later decisions holding that executing people with intellectual disability violates the constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Prisons as Institutions: An Overview of Challenges Facing Prisoners with IDD and Proposed Solutions Under the ADA and Other Disability Rights Laws (University of Minnesota Impact Magazine, 2017)

/in , , , , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

Individuals with IDD are dramatically over-represented in prisons and jails and face unique barriers. Powerful laws exist to protect them, but prisoners need accessible resources to assist them in advocating for their rights. This article explores recommendations to ensure equity for prisoners with IDD.

Using the ADA’s ‘Integration Mandate’ to Disrupt Mass Incarceration (Denver Law Review, 2019)

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by Pam Katz

This document explores how advocates have used, and are beginning to use in new ways, the “integration mandate” of the Americans with Disabilities Act to advocate for the rights of individuals with disabilities to avoid unnecessary entanglement with the criminal justice system.