Supreme Court ruling could undermine disability rights protections, advocates fear

Numerous federal laws that ensure people with disabilities have rights to everything from health care to community living could be legally challenged after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 40-year-old precedent.

In a ruling late last month, the Supreme Court said courts should no longer rely on federal agencies’ interpretations in situations where the rules are unclear.

The decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturns the court’s 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which shaped how federal agencies did their work for decades. Under that approach, the government relied on its own experts in each agency to fill in the details explaining how various laws should be applied in practice.

“Chevron is overruled. Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency acted within its statutory authority,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority in the latest ruling. “Courts need not, and under the (Administrative Procedures Act) may not, defer to an agency’s interpretation of the law simply because the statute is ambiguous.”

Now advocates fear the Supreme Court’s ruling will effectively open up the federal rulebook to litigation, which could have huge implications for people with disabilities. It could also make federal agencies much more cautious about writing rules in the future.

“The impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper could be devastating for people with disabilities,” said Maria Town, president and CEO of the American Association of People with Disabilities, who said her group is “deeply concerned that this decision will open the door to a flood of lawsuits seeking to overturn federal disability rights laws.”

In practice, federal laws play a key role in enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and many other laws protecting the rights of people with disabilities, advocates say.

This year alone, the federal government finalized regulations banning disability discrimination in health care, spelled out how the ADA would be applied online, updated the Supplemental Security Income program and Medicaid home and community-based services, and made other changes.

“The decision could lead to an increase in litigation as industries and others challenge existing and new regulations,” said Kim Musheno, vice president of public policy at the Autism Society of America. “This could have particular impact in areas where regulations provide access to health care, public accommodations and other critical services for people with disabilities, potentially undermining decades of progress in disability rights and protections.”

The regulatory process is unique, advocates say, because it draws on subject matter experts and includes a public comment period, giving people with disabilities a chance to weigh in on changes that could affect them. Now, with more attention likely to shift to the courts, they worry that the voices of those most familiar with the regulations, which are often technical and highly detailed, could be overlooked.

“For a long time, courts have relied on the expertise of specialized agencies to interpret and implement federal laws and programs, ensuring that the needs and rights of people with disabilities are properly understood and protected,” said Shira Wakschlag, senior director of legal defense and general counsel at The Arc. “Without this respect, people with disabilities are exposed to potentially less informed and less consistent legal decisions.”

Read more stories like this one. Sign up for Disability Scoop’s free newsletter to get the latest developmental disabilities news delivered straight to your inbox.