State Anti-Discrimination Law as a Model For Amending the Americans with Disabilities Act

Abstract

By now, the rise and fall of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a familiar story. The Act was hailed as a revolutionary measure that would bring individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of American life. Instead of relying on outdated notions that defined an individual’s disability solely on the basis of the existence of an impairment or an impairment that prevented the individual from being gainfully employed, the ADA, like its predecessor, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,3 was to take a functional, civil rights approach to the problem of disability discrimination. With its creation of a three-pronged definition of disability, Congress took notice of the fact that not all actual physical or mental impairments were inherently limiting, and that, in the words of the Supreme Court, “society’s accumulated myths and fears about disability and disease are as handicapping as are the physical limitations that flow from actual impairment.” Thus, the ADA would cover individuals who not only had actual physical or mental impairments that substantially limited major life activities, but also those individuals who had records of such impairments or were regarded as having such impairments.

Do State Laws Protecting Older Workers from Discrimination Reduce Age Discrimination in Hiring? Experimental (and Nonexperimental) Evidence

“…Some states use a laxer definition, changing a key part of the definition of disability from "substantially limits one or more major life activities" to either "materially limits" (Minnesota) or just "limits" (California). Other states vary the definition of disability by requiring that the disability be "medically diagnosed" without regard to whether the impairment limits major life activities (Long, 2004). Table 2 includes information on both dimensions of the definition of disability, and we use both in our analysis.…”

Does Protecting Older Workers from Discrimination Make it Harder to Get Hired? Revised with Additional Analysis of SIPP Data and Appendix of Disability Laws

“…In particular, one section may define what a discriminatory act is, while other provisions may be delegated to the Civil Rights Commission, or the remedies may be listed under a different section of the statute. 7 These included Beegle and Stock (2003), Buckley and Green (2011, 2009, 2006, 2002, 1997, Colker and Milani (2002), DRI (2011), Green (1992), Long (2004), Perry (2011), and a 50-state survey of discrimination laws at http://www.navexglobal.com/sites/default/files/uploads/lb_Descrimination-50States.pdf (viewed September 22, 2014).…”

“…Several states (CT, IL, NJ, NY, and WA) adopt an even laxer definition, considering an individual to be disabled if their impairment is medically diagnosed, regardless of whether the impairment substantially limits one or more major life activities. Long (2004) argues, as seems quite reasonable, that these medical definitions broaden coverage relative to the ADA.…”

“…Connecticut is even more explicit in its definition of mental disability (Long, 2004), as CONN. GEN. STAT. § 46a-51(20) states that " 'Mental disability' refers to an individual who has a record of, or is regarded as having one or more mental disorders, as defined in the most recent edition of the American Psychiatric Association's 'Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.'"…”

“…(2) has a record of such an 2 impairment; or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment." While the distinction between materially and substantially may seem trivial, Long (2004) notes that the Minnesota Supreme Court, in Sigurdson v. Carl Bolander & Sons, Co., 532 N.W.2d 225, 228 n.3 (Minn. 1995), stated that the Minnesota definition is less stringent.…”