The Role of the Courts in Securing Welfare Rights and ...

Welfare Law CenterIn what kinds of welfare cases have ADA claims been raised?The following examples illustrate the range of problems for which plaintiffs have soughtrelief under the ADA. (In some cases there may have been Rehabilitation Act claims as well.)Note that some cases do not rely exclusively on the ADA but raise other legal claims as well. Inaddition, in some cases the court did not reach a decision because the parties settled the case.Eligibility criteriaAFDC program rules: There was litigation over the AFDC option to cover children upto age 19 if they were expected to graduate from secondary school by age 19. Plaintiffschallenged state decisions to deny AFDC to 18 year old high school students who were not likelyto graduate from high school before their 19 th birthdays because of their disabilities. ADAchallenges in two cases resulted in one favorable decision and one unfavorable decision. InHoward v. Dept. of Social Welfare, 26 the Vermont court concluded that the requirement was notan essential eligibility requirement. It rejected arguments that federal law mandated therequirement, finding that the state could fund such benefits on its own, that there was noevidence that HHS has refused to make reasonable accommodations by providing federalmatching for individual cases to avoid discrimination based on disability, and that the state couldnot discriminate against those with disabilities to stay within state appropriation limits. Itconcluded that extending plaintiffs’ benefits until age 19 was a reasonable modification andmandated by the ADA. In Aughe v. Shalala, 27 a federal court concluded that the requirement thata student complete high school by age 19 was an essential eligibility requirement of the AFDCprogram and that the ADA and Rehabilitation Act did not require modification of therequirement.General assistance (GA) rules: Time limits on GA benefits for disabled individualswere challenged in two states on ADA grounds with one favorable and one unfavorable decision.In Weaver v. New Mexico Human Services Dept., 28 the court concluded that imposing a twelvemonth time limit on benefits for GA recipients with disabilities but not on GA benefits forMay 1999⋅ 12 ⋅