Disability Law Commons^™

Understanding The History Of Institutionalization: Making Connections To De-Institutionalization And The Olmstead Act For Persons With Intellectual Disabilities In The State Of Illinois, Nancy A. Cheeseman

Dissertations

What is the historical connection between deinstitutionalization and the Olmstead decision? The purpose of this study was to examine and analyze policy within a historical perspective the connections between institutional care, deinstitutionalization, the Olmstead decision, and the effect on persons with intellectual disabilities lived experience, in the state of Illinois.

The data collected include, the transcripts of interviews with four participants, artifacts from policy documents and historical papers accessed from the Disability Museum online journals. The creation of a table for use in coding themes as associated with 5 (out of 18) core concepts for disability policy.

The Olmstead decision …

Accidentally On Purpose: Intent In Disability Discrimination Law, Mark Weber

College of Law Faculty

American disability discrimination laws contain few intent requirements. Yet courts frequently demand showings of intent in disability discrimination lawsuits. Intent requirements arose almost by accident: through a false statutory analogy; by repetition of obsolete judicial language; and by doctrine developed to avoid a nonexistent conflict with another law. Demanding that section 504 and Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) claimants show intent imposes a burden not found in those statutes or their interpretive regulations. This Article provides reasons not to impose intent requirements for liability or monetary relief in section 504 and ADA cases concerning reasonable accommodations. It demonstrates that no …

Accidentally On Purpose: Intent In Disability Discrimination Law, Mark C. Weber

Mark C. Weber

American disability discrimination laws contain few intent requirements. Yet courts frequently demand showings of intent in disability discrimination lawsuits. Intent requirements arose almost by accident: through a false statutory analogy; by repetition of obsolete judicial language; and by doctrine developed to avoid a nonexistent conflict with another law. Demanding that section 504 and Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) claimants show intent imposes a burden not found in those statutes or their interpretive regulations. This Article provides reasons not to impose intent requirements for liability or monetary relief in section 504 and ADA cases concerning reasonable accommodations. It demonstrates that no …