chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.

History of Disability Rights Milestones and Laws

1945

“National Employ the Physically Handicapped Week”

President Truman declares the first week of October “National Employ the Physically Handicapped Week,” which is renamed in 1962 to “National Employ the Handicapped Week,” and in 1988 becomes “National Disability Employment Awareness Month.” This month encourages the employment of individuals with disabilities and raises awareness about their employment needs and achievements.

1960

Disability Rights Movement

The disability rights movement began when the civil rights movement started and disability advocates joined forces alongside other minority groups to demand equal treatment, equal access and equal opportunity for people with disabilities.

1961

First Accessibility Standard

The American Standards Association introduces the first accessibility standard.

1968

Architectural Barriers Act

Congress enacts the Architectural Barriers Act requiring that buildings or facilities designed, built, or altered with federal money or leased by federal agencies be accessible.

1973

Rehabilitation Act of 1973

Congress passes the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits disability-based discrimination in programs conducted by federal agencies and receiving federal financial assistance, as well as in federal employment and in the employment practices of federal contractors.

1975

Education for All Handicapped Children Act

Congress enacts the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) to support states and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the individual needs of, and improving the results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families. In 1990, the law is renamed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and is last reauthorized in 2004.

1977

504 Sit-in

Disability rights activists, including Judy Heumann, Kitty Cone, Brad Lomax, Mary Jane Owen, Corbett O'Toole, and Hale Zukas, stage a sit-in protest in San Francisco to demand greater accessibility and accommodations for people with disabilities. Known as the “504 Sit-in,” the protest was sparked by the government's failure to implement Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

1978

National Council on Disability

The National Council on the Handicapped under the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is established. In 1984, the Council becomes an independent federal agency and is renamed to the National Council on Disability (NCD). Comprised of nine members, including five presidential appointees and four congressional appointees, the NCD advises the President, Congress, and executive branch agencies on policies that promote the goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

1982

Supreme Court: Rowley

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Board of Ed. of Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist., Westchester Cty. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, that the IDEA’s “free and appropriate public education” (FAPE) requirement is satisfied if the child’s individualized education program (IEP) sets out an educational program that is “reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefits.”

1984

Supreme Court: Robinson

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in Smith v. Robinson, 468 U.S. 992, rules that Congress intended the Education of the Handicapped Act (now the IDEA) is the exclusive avenue for disabled students asserting their right to equal access to public education. To allow a plaintiff to circumvent the EHA's administrative remedies by relying on § 1983 as a remedy for a substantial equal protection claim would be inconsistent with that scheme.

1985

Supreme Court: Cleburne

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, that the denial of a special use permit to Cleburne Living Centers, Inc. was premised on an irrational prejudice against persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities and therefore was unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.

1986

Congress Authorizes Fees in EHA Civil Suits

Congress amends the EHA, authorizing the award of reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs to the parents or guardian of a handicapped child or youth who is the prevailing party in a civil suit under such Act to protect the child's right to a FAPE.

1988

Supreme Court: Honig

The U.S. Supreme Court decides in Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, that the EAHCA’s ‘stay-put” provision prohibits state or local school authorities from unilaterally excluding disabled children from the classroom for dangerous or disruptive conduct growing out of their disabilities during the pendency of review proceedings. The Court declined to rewrite the statute to infer a “dangerousness” exception based on obviousness or congressional inadvertence. However, school administrators could use normal, nonplacement-changing procedures, including temporary suspensions for up to 10 schooldays for students posing an immediate threat to others' safety, while the Act allows for interim placements where parents and school officials are able to agree, and authorizes officials to file a suit for "appropriate" injunctive relief where such an agreement cannot be reached.

1990

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

President George H.W. Bush signs the ADA into law, the world's first comprehensive civil rights law for people with disabilities prohibiting discrimination in employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications, and access to state and local government’ programs and services.

1996

Telecommunications Act of 1996

Congress passes the Telecommunications Act of 1996, requiring under Section 255 telecommunications products and services to be accessible to people with disabilities to the extent access is readily achievable, meaning easily accomplishable, without much difficulty or expense. If manufacturers cannot make their products accessible then they must design products to be compatible with adaptive equipment used by people with disabilities, where readily achievable.

1996

Mental Health Parity Act

Congress passes the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 (MHPA), providing that large group health plans cannot impose annual or lifetime dollar limits on mental health benefits that are less favorable than any such limits imposed on medical/surgical benefits. In 2008, the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act extended the parity requirements to substance use disorders.

1998

EIT Accessibility

Congress amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to require federal agencies to make their electronic and information technology (EIT), also referred to as information and communication technology (ICT), accessible to people with disabilities.

1999

The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act

The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act are signed in law to increase the options for individuals with disabilities who receive Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income but wish to return to work while maintaining necessary support.

1999

Supreme Court: Sutton

The U.S. Supreme Court clarifies in Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471, [superseded by The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA)] that the determination whether an individual is disabled under the ADA should be made with reference to measures, such as eyeglasses and contact lenses, that mitigate the individual's impairment, and that the approach adopted by the agency guidelines is an impermissible interpretation of the ADA.

1999

Murphy v. UPS: Court Limits ADA Protection

The U.S. Supreme Court decides in Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 527 U.S. 516, [superseded by The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA)] that when medicated, petitioner's high blood pressure does not substantially limit him in any major life activity and therefore is not a protected disability under the ADA.

1999

Supreme Court: Albertson’s

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Albertson's, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, 527 U.S. 555, [superseded by The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA)] that the Ninth Circuit appeared to suggest that it need not take account of a monocular individual's ability to compensate for the impairment, even though it acknowledged that respondent’s brain had subconsciously done just that.

1999

Supreme Court: Olmstead

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581, that the unjustified segregation of persons with disabilities constitutes discrimination in violation of Title II of the ADA. Specifically, public entities must provide community-based services to persons with disabilities when (1) such services are appropriate; (2) the affected persons do not oppose community-based treatment; and (3) community-based services can be reasonably accommodated taking into account the resources available to the public entity and the needs of others who are receiving disability services from the entity.

2001

Supreme Court: Garrett

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Board of Trs. of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, that the Eleventh Amendment barred state employees’ suits in federal court seeking to recover money damages under Title I of the ADA.

2002

Supreme Court: Toyota

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky Inc. v. Williams¸ 534 U.S. 184, [superseded by The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA)] that under the ADA, a person is substantially limited in a major life activity if they have “an impairment that prevents or significantly restricts the individual from doing activities that are of central importance to most people's daily lives.”

2004

Supreme Court: Lane

The U.S. Supreme Court decides in Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, that Title II of the ADA, as it applies to the class of cases implicating the fundamental right of access to the courts, constitutes a valid exercise of Congress’ authority under §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enforce that Amendment’s substantive guarantees.

2005

Supreme Court: Spector

The U.S. Supreme Court decides in Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., 545 U.S. 119, that the ADA applies to aboard foreign cruise ships in American waters as long as it did not conflict with any international law.

2005

Disability Justice Movement

Disabled activists of color Patty Berne, Mia Mingus, and Stacey Milbern launched the framework of “disability justice” to expand upon the “disability rights” movement, which established civil rights for people with disabilities. This social justice movement focuses on examining disability and ableism as they relate to other forms of oppression and identity such as race, class, and gender.

2008

ADA Amendments Act

President George W. Bush signs into law the ADA Amendments Act, rejecting the holdings in several U.S. Supreme Court decisions and portions of the EEOCS’s ADA regulations and construing the definition of “disability” in favor of broad coverage of individuals to the maximum extent permitted by the terms of the ADA.

2010

2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design

The U.S. Department of Justice publishes revised regulations for Titles II and III of the ADA, adopting the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design, which set minimum requirements for newly designed, constructed, or altered state and local government facilities, public accommodations, and commercial facilities, so as to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.

2013

Rehab Act Section 503 Updated

Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act is updated and prohibits qualified applicants and employees from being discriminated against based on their disability.

2017

Supreme Court: Fry

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Fry ex rel. E.F. v. Napoleon Cmty. Schs., 580 U.S. 154, that so long as a lawsuit centers on something other than the denial of a FAPE, there is no need to exhaust administrative remedies under the IDEA before filing suit.

2022

Supreme Court: Cummings

The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, PLLC, 596 U.S. 212, that a person suing for disability discrimination under the Affordable Care Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 cannot recover emotional distress damages.

2023

Supreme Court: Luna Perez

The U.S. Supreme Court holes in Luna Perez v. Sturgis Pub. Schs., 598 U.S. 142, that the IDEA’s administrative exhaustion requirement poses no bar where a non-IDEA plaintiff sues for a remedy that is unavailable under IDEA.