The case is about accessibility information on hotel websites, but arguments focused on questions about whether the plaintiff could bring the lawsuit and whether the case is moot.
The ADA absolutely requires Disabled people to file private lawsuits in order to remedy discrimination, including when interpreters are denied in medical situations for Deaf people. This allows the perpetual denial of interpreters within the medical crisis itself, and the “solution” is a private lawsuit after the fact, that maybe someday is fixing the situation for others down the road.
It is plainly obvious that people don’t understand that this is exactly how the ADA works. It’s terrible! Disabled people and Deaf people have no EEOC-like agency to report discrimination to, and no capacity to fix problems unless they themselves sue. Make an ADA agency. Remove the requirement for private lawsuits. Make reporting discrimination simple and easy.
I’ve experienced interpreter denial thousands of times, and sucked it up, especially in hospitals, because I was always seriously ill and couldn’t simply walk out and get treatment elsewhere. Medical appointments weren’t much better than that. Hell, it would be great if it was easy to get interpreter access paid for.
In Minnesota, health insurance plans pay for the interpreter, removing any cost burdens on the medical facility. But in other situations it can be more difficult. A small federal tax to pay for interpreters would be way better than perpetual discrimination, 33 years later.
isn't this a little more consequential than the website case from last term?