Ex Parte Blaine Milam

/in , , , , , , /by Shira Wakschlag

Filed: July 18, 2024

Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

Overview: Amicus brief alongside other disability rights organizations arguing that Supreme Court precedent requires courts to refer to clinical standards when determining intellectual disability in death penalty cases.

Excerpt: “In Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), the United States Supreme Court held that executing defendants with intellectual disability violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Subsequently, in Hall v. Florida, 134 S. Ct. 1986 (2014), in accord with the clinical consensus, the United States Supreme Court rejected an arbitrary cutoff for intelligence quotient (“IQ”) scores in making the intellectual disability determination and emphasized the importance of courts’ adherence to the appropriate clinical standards in their analysis. In Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (2017) (hereinafter “Moore I”), the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments requires that adjudications of intellectual disability in death penalty cases be “informed by the views of medical experts” and that the non-clinical factors adopted in Ex parte Briseño, 135 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) may no longer be used because they create an unacceptable risk that persons with intellectual disability will be executed. Following the Supreme Court’s lead, this Court has held that Texas courts ‘must be informed by the current medical diagnostic framework for assessing intellectual disability’ when determining whether a person has intellectual disability. Petetan v. State, 622 S.W.3d 321, 357 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021); Moore I, 137 S. Ct. at 1044. Courts must insist on the use of the clinical framework in evaluating Atkins claims. Otherwise, they risk violating the Eighth Amendment and unconstitutionally sentencing individuals to death.”

Case Documents:

Press Releases & Explainers:

Related Media:

Guthrey v. Alta California Regional Center

/in , , , , , , /by Evan Monod

Filed: July 11, 2024

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

Overview: Amicus brief arguing that California regional centers and their vendors, which coordinate and deliver services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, are places of public accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Excerpt: “Because they have physical buildings at which and from which they provide services to the public, California Regional Centers and their vendors (including Defendants/Appellees) are all places of public accommodation under Title III of the ADA. . .and the services they provide individuals like Plaintiffs/Appellants are covered by that statute. . .This Circuit’s requirement that discrimination challenged under Title III have a ‘nexus’ to a physical building simply requires a connection to that building; it does not require that the discrimination have occurred on the physical premises. The district court’s opinion requiring a showing that the challenged services were provided at Defendants’ offices. . . improperly restricted the reach of Title III, contrary to the plain language of the statute, its legislative history, and this Circuit’s precedent. The district court also improperly required that plaintiffs establish a violation of the ADA as a prerequisite to a claim under either Section 504 or the Unruh Act. These holdings are completely unsupported, as the three statutes – while all addressing disability discrimination – do so in different contexts with, as a result, different required factual predicates.  Ultimately, by eliminating all recourse for individuals with IDD to challenge discrimination by Regional Centers and their vendors, the district court’s decision threatens to undermine years of progress through both the ADA and California’s Lanterman Act.”

Case Documents:

Related Media:

The Arc Expresses Support for H.R. 2941, Recognizing the Role of Direct Support Professionals Act

/in , , , , , /by The Arc

The Arc of the United States submitted a letter of support for H.R. 2941, Recognizing the Role of Direct Support Professionals Act. The legislation would urge the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to consider including a code for direct support professionals (DSPs) in its revision of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) manual. The omission of a DSP SOC code leads to a lack of data on the DSP workforce, the devaluation of the profession, and likely lower reimbursement rates as a result.

The Arc Sends Letter Encouraging Swift Passage of Autism CARES Act

/in , , , , , , /by The Arc

The Arc expressed its strong support for the Autism CARES Act, which is critical legislation for research and training programs. The proposed bill reauthorizes the programs for another five years. The Arc encouraged the bill to pass quickly to ensure the current bill does not expire.

The Arc Responds to FDA’s Proposed Rule to Ban Electro-Stimulation Devices for Aggressive or Self-Injurious Behavior

/in , , , , , , /by The Arc

The Arc submitted comments to a proposed rule by the FDA to ban electrical stimulation devices for aggressive or self-injurious behavior. These devices are used by only one institution in Massachusetts, and The Arc has been fighting for decades to protect its residents from this abuse.

The Arc Sends Letter to Energy and Commerce Subcommittee Regarding the Hearing, Legislative Proposals to Increase Medicaid Access and Improve Program Integrity

/in , , , , , /by The Arc

The Arc expressed its support for several bills being reviewed by the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health at a hearing on expanding access to Medicaid. The legislation reviewed included making Money Follows the Person permanent, portability of Medicaid benefits for dependents of military families, and modifications to the Medicaid buy-in program for older working adults.

The Arc Sends Letter on the Long-Term Care Workforce Support Act

/in , , , , , /by The Arc

The Long-Term Care Workforce Support Act would provide major investments and protections for workers across the long-term care settings. The Arc applauded Senator Casey (D-PA) for developing legislation to address this pressing issue.

City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson

/in , , , , , , /by The Arc

Filed: April 3, 2024

Court: U.S. Supreme Court

Overview: Amicus brief arguing that the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits cities from criminalizing conduct associated with being unhoused.

Excerpt: “People with disabilities face unique challenges and deep-rooted stigmas that increase their risk for homelessness. Less than 5% of housing in the United States is accessible for moderate mobility disabilities, and less than 1% is accessible for wheelchair use. Housing costs are prohibitive for many disabled people who rely on public assistance for basic costs of living—the average cost of a one-bedroom apartment in the United States exceeds the maximum monthly Supplemental Security Income a person can receive. Moreover, widespread housing discrimination on the basis of disability further compounds the risk of homelessness. The Ordinances’ impact on homeless people with disabilities highlights how grossly out of proportion the punishments they impose are to the severity of the offense. Simply put, criminalizing the involuntary conduct of being a homeless person without a place to sleep—in a city with no public shelters—is anathema to the decency standards of any civilized society.”

Case Documents:

Press Releases:

Related Media:

Storytelling Toolkit for People With Disabilities and Advocates

/in , , , /by The Arc

Your life and experiences are powerful and valuable. Sharing your story can change people’s hearts and minds.

This toolkit will help you create and share your stories to raise awareness about an issue, encourage elected officials to change laws or policies, ask people to support changes you want to make in your life, and share about what your life is like.

Download the resources below to get started!

Intersections of Disability and Rurality: Elevating Family Voices

/in , , /by The Arc

In this recorded webinar, you will hear from Jessica Curd about rural caregiving and disability. She talks about how poverty, living in rural areas, caregiving, and having a disability can overlap and create higher risks and vulnerability. She also talks about a study she did with Dr. John Keesler. They listened to families in rural areas with kids with autism and let them share their experiences. Jessica explains how they did the study and what they found. She also talks about ideas from the families for how to help more.

Download the presentation here.