Pathways to Justice: Get the Facts Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
This fact sheet provides an overview of autism, autism and the criminal justice system, and identification and communication tips for justice professionals.
Public Policy Agenda for the 116th Congress Brochure
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPAll StatesAdvocacy, Civil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justice, Direct Support Professionals, Education, Employment, Family support and future planning, Health, Health Care, Housing, Medicaid, Paid leave, Social security, Technology, Travel / Transportation, VolunteeringFact sheet/by The ArcBrochure summarizing the joint federal public policy agenda of The Arc, AAIDD, ASA, NACDD, and UCP for the 116th Congress (2019-2020).
Public Policy Agenda for the 116th Congress
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPAll StatesAdvocacy, Civil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justice, Direct Support Professionals, Education, Employment, Family support and future planning, Health, Health Care, Housing, Medicaid, Paid leave, Social security, Technology, Travel / Transportation, VolunteeringFact sheet/by The ArcThe Arc partnered with AAIDD, ASA, NACDD, and UCP to create this joint federal public policy agenda for the 116th Congress (2019-2020).
Click here to view a brochure summarizing the joint federal public policy agenda.
The Arc’s Position Statements
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPAll StatesAdvocacy, Civil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justice, Direct Support Professionals, Education, Employment, Family support and future planning, Health, Health Care, Housing, Medicaid, Paid leave, Social security, Technology, Travel / Transportation, VolunteeringPosition Statement/by The ArcThe Arc’s position statements address critical issues related to human and civil rights, health care and treatment, and services and programs for children and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families.
Position statements are used to inform The Arc’s public policy agenda, as well as to provide the national platform of positions of The Arc for use by chapters at all levels of The Arc in its work – national, state, and local. The statements also serve to inform our constituency, stakeholders, media, and the general public on the prevailing organizational view on key issues.
Position Statement: Criminal Justice System
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPAll StatesCivil rights, Criminal justicePosition Statement/by The ArcPosition statement of The Arc and the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities on the criminal justice system.
National Disability Rights Network – Member Agencies
/in Advocate, Family member, Person with a disabilityAll StatesAdvocacy, Civil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justice, Education, Employment, Family support and future planning, Health, Health Care, Housing, Medicaid, Social security, Technology, Travel / TransportationOther/by The ArcProtection and advocacy organizations, located in each state and territory, help people with disabilities ensure their basic rights, fight abuse, and advocate for equal access and accountability in health care, education, and employment. This link will connect you with a listing of protection and advocacy organization in each state.
Seth v. District of Columbia
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPDistric of ColumbiaCivil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justiceLitigation/by The ArcState: District of Columbia
Filed: 2018
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Plaintiffs: Mr. Seth
Defendants: District of Columbia, District of Columbia Department on Disability Services
Counsel: The Arc, Brown Goldstein & Levy, Robert Dinerstein, Skadden Arps
Overview: This lawsuit challenges the indefinite incarceration of Mr. Seth, a young man with intellectual disability languishing in federal prison despite not having been convicted of a crime in violation of his right under state and federal law to receive services and treatment in the most integrated setting appropriate to his needs. Mr. Seth, after having been found by the court to be incompetent to stand trial, has been held in federal prison rather than a community-based program in D.C., where he is from and where his family and support system reside. Despite the fact that the District’s Department on Disability Services’ experts concluded that Mr. Seth could be safely served in the community, the District has refused to provide such services to Mr. Seth in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the D.C. Human Rights Act. Because of the District’s inaction, Mr. Seth has been left to languish in federal prison for years, frequently placed in solitary confinement.
Case Documents
D.C. Circuit Amicus Brief: Local D.C. Advocacy Organizations
D.C. Circuit Amicus Brief: Experts in Disability Services
D.C. Circuit Amicus Brief: Former Correctional Officials
D.C. Circuit Amicus Brief: National Disability Organizations
Related Media
Courthouse News Service: DC Disability Agency Accused of Ignoring Plight of Imprisoned Man
Postawko v. Missouri Department of Corrections
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPMissouriCivil rights, Criminal justice, Health, Health CareLitigation/by The ArcState: Missouri
Filed: 2018
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Overview: The brief supported a class of Missouri prisoners seeking life-saving medical treatment while in prison and alleging that the state’s Department of Corrections refused to treat thousands of inmates with Hepatitis C in defiance of medical standards and in violation of the ADA. The brief argued for the importance of class action lawsuits as a tool for civil rights enforcement.
Excerpt: “An unlawful policy or practice will always cause differing degrees of actual injury to individual class members, depending on their vulnerabilities, and some may be lucky enough to escape harm altogether. One foster child will be placed in a family rife with abuse and another with loving foster parents; one person will have disabilities that necessitate 24-hour support while another is able to live independently; one immigrant in detention will suffer lasting health consequences without regular medication and monitoring while her cellmate will stay healthy. If such variations were sufficient to defeat class certification, system-wide relief from illegal policies and practices would almost always be out of reach, and shifting populations in the custody of the government would have lost a vital tool for vindicating their rights.”
Case Documents
Amicus Brief: Postawko v. Missouri Department of Corrections
People v. McCollum
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPNew YorkCivil rights, Community-based LTSS, Criminal justiceLitigation/by The ArcState: New York
Filed: December 20, 2018
Court: Supreme Court of the State of New York
Overview: The brief supported Darius McCollum, an adult with autism charged with unauthorized driving of city trains and buses. In an unprecedented decision, the lower court found that, based on his autism diagnosis, Darius met the criteria for a “dangerous mental disorder” and committed him to a psychiatric institution for the most violent offenders despite him never having committed a violent crime. The brief argued that this placement is wholly inappropriate for someone like Darius, who could thrive in the community with appropriate supports and services.
Excerpt: “The principle of community integration…enshrined in the Americans with Disabilities Act…requires public entities to avoid needless institutionalization of individuals with disabilities who can be served in community settings. Decades of research and experience compel the conclusion that community-based services deliver better outcomes for individuals who do not require institutionalization, and better serve the purpose of [state law] to balance individual rights and public safety.”
Case Documents
Moore v. Texas
/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSPTexasCriminal justiceLitigation/by The ArcState: Texas
Filed: 2016/2017
Court: United States Supreme Court, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Overview: The brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 argued that Texas distorted the clinical definition of intellectual disability by devising a formula of exclusionary factors that rests heavily on stereotypes. This approach is wholly inconsistent with accepted scientific standards and leads to inaccurate and unreliable results. The brief argues that the deliberate decision to reject clinical standards in the adjudication of death penalty cases is inconsistent with prior Supreme Court precedent in Atkins v. Virginia and Hall v. Florida and incompatible with the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. In 2017, the Court held that Texas’ use of stereotypical and outdated factors—rather than well-established clinical standards—to determine intellectual disability in death penalty cases was unconstitutional, since they “create an unacceptable risk that persons with intellectual disability will be executed.” The case was then remanded to the Texas Court of Criminal (TCCA) appeals to redo its disability determination consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion. The Arc filed another brief in support of Mr. Moore before the TCCA. In 2018, the TCCA again found that Mr. Moore did not have intellectual disability and should be executed. A strong dissent from Judge Elsa Alcala cited The Arc’s amicus brief and noted that the majority opinion was inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent. Mr. Moore again petitioned for U.S. Supreme Court review.
Excerpt: “There is a wide gap between the clinical definition, on the one hand, and on the other, expectations that many laypeople have about what intellectual disability…means…Distorting the definition with invented exclusionary factors is fundamentally inconsistent with the clinical understanding of intellectual disability, and has no support in the scientific and clinical literature in the field…Texas’ invention and adoption of a list of unscientific criteria for adaptive functioning has the effect (and, apparently, the purpose) of limiting the protection of Atkins to a sub-set of those defendants who satisfy the clinical definition of intellectual disability. This is incompatible with the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of Cruel and Unusual Punishments. Amici believe that the basic framework of the clinical definition is the constitutionally required standard for determining whether a defendant has intellectual disability.”
Case Documents
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Brief
2017 U.S. Supreme Court Decision
2018 Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Decision
2019 U.S. Supreme Court Decision
Press Releases
- The Arc Applauds Commutation of Bobby Moore Death Sentence
- The Arc Applauds Supreme Court’s Decisive Rejection of Texas’ “Wholly Nonclinical,” “Outlier” Standards in Determining Intellectual Disability”
- The Arc Responds to Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Ruling in Bobby Moore Case
- Supreme Court Reaffirms Commitment to Clinical Standards, Not Stereotypes, In Determining Intellectual Disability in Death Penalty Cases
Related Media
- Texas Tribune: Bobby Moore’s death sentence is changed to life in prison after lengthy court fights over intellectual disability
- Pacific Standard: SCOTUS Just Made It Harder To Execute Intellectually Disabled Prisoners
- Austin American Statesman: Why Bobby Moore Should Not Be on Texas’ Death Row
- The Atlantic: A Victory for the Eighth Amendment
- The Texas Tribune: For the second time, U.S. Supreme Court reverses death sentence decision for Texas inmate Bobby Moore
- New York Times: Texas Used Wrong Standard in Death Penalty Cases, Justices Rule
- New York Times: Supreme Court to Consider Legal Standard Drawn From ‘Of Mice and Men’
- Slate: When Will Texas Stop Executing People Whose Death Sentences Are Unconstitutional?
- The New Yorker: Will the Supreme Court Stop Texas from Executing the Intellectually Disabled?
About Us
CONNECT
Policy & Advocacy
Our Initiatives
Sign Up for Email Updates
The Arc promotes and protects the human rights of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and actively supports their full inclusion and participation in the community throughout their lifetimes.
