ADA enforcement through agency adjudications
🔍 What’s the Issue?
The ADA (enacted in 1990) prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in:
Employment (Title I)
Public services (Title II)
Public accommodations (Title III)
Much of ADA enforcement is handled administratively — that means through agency adjudications, investigations, and negotiated settlements, before (or instead of) going to court.
Key federal agencies involved:
EEOC → handles employment-related ADA claims
DOJ (Civil Rights Division) → enforces Titles II & III
OCR (Office for Civil Rights, HHS) → enforces health and education-related accessibility
DOT and FCC also issue regulations and adjudicate ADA-related disputes
⚖️ Legal Process in Agency Adjudications
Complaint filed with agency (e.g., EEOC)
Agency investigates the facts and may attempt conciliation
Administrative hearing or ALJ (Administrative Law Judge) decision
Possible agency sanctions, orders, or referral to DOJ for litigation
Agencies must follow Administrative Procedure Act (APA) standards:
Fair hearing
Substantial evidence review
Right to appeal
📚 CASE LAW (More Than Five Cases)
Here are six detailed cases that show how ADA enforcement works through agencies or gets challenged in court after agency action:
✅ 1. EEOC v. Ford Motor Co. (2015)
Court: Sixth Circuit (en banc)
Facts: A disabled employee sought to work from home as a reasonable accommodation. Ford argued in-person work was essential.
Agency role: EEOC pursued the case after administrative findings.
Ruling: The court sided with Ford, emphasizing that attendance was essential to the job.
Significance: Showed limits on ADA accommodation and deference to employers’ definitions of essential duties — even when agency adjudicators initially disagreed.
✅ 2. EEOC v. Walmart Stores (2021)
Court: Eighth Circuit
Facts: Walmart refused to accommodate a deaf employee by declining to provide an interpreter.
Agency process: EEOC brought the case after an investigation and failed conciliation.
Ruling: Walmart was found to have violated the ADA.
Outcome: $125 million jury verdict (reduced on appeal).
Significance: Validated EEOC’s administrative adjudication and enforcement role, showing that informal agency findings can lead to substantial damages.
✅ 3. Department of Transportation Adjudication: Access Board Complaint (2017)
Context: A passenger with mobility impairments filed a complaint against a regional transit authority for inaccessible buses.
Agency: DOT adjudicated the claim through administrative review.
Finding: Transit authority violated ADA transit regulations.
Remedy: Required corrective action and periodic compliance reports.
Significance: Demonstrated non-court ADA enforcement through technical agency review.
✅ 4. Office for Civil Rights (OCR) v. University of Montana (2012)
Agency: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights
Facts: OCR investigated whether the university’s digital materials (PDFs, websites, videos) were accessible to blind students.
Outcome: OCR issued a Resolution Agreement requiring full accessibility compliance.
Significance: OCR used its adjudicatory and enforcement power to expand ADA protections into digital access — well before courts fully adopted this.
✅ 5. EEOC v. Dollar General (2020)
Court: U.S. District Court
Facts: Employee with anxiety and PTSD was denied schedule flexibility.
Agency role: EEOC filed the case after finding cause in administrative adjudication.
Result: Settlement requiring new ADA training and back pay.
Significance: Highlighted how agency investigations lead to binding settlements, even without trial.
✅ 6. DOJ v. AMC Theatres (2008)
Court: U.S. District Court
Facts: DOJ sued AMC for not having accessible seating with similar sightlines in stadium-style movie theaters.
Agency action: DOJ first conducted agency-level ADA reviews of theaters before litigation.
Ruling: AMC required to retrofit theaters.
Significance: Showed DOJ’s hybrid approach — starting with administrative enforcement and escalating to federal court.
🔁 Summary Table
| Case | Agency | Key Lesson |
|---|---|---|
| EEOC v. Ford | EEOC | Not all accommodations are “reasonable” under ADA |
| EEOC v. Walmart | EEOC | Interpreter refusal can bring major liability |
| DOT Adjudication | DOT | Accessibility complaints handled fully in agency |
| OCR v. Montana | OCR (DOE) | ADA applies to digital materials — enforced administratively |
| EEOC v. Dollar General | EEOC | Agency findings lead to binding private settlements |
| DOJ v. AMC | DOJ | DOJ uses agency investigation + litigation strategy |
🧠 Core Takeaways:
ADA enforcement often starts and ends at the agency level.
Agencies like EEOC, DOJ, DOT, and OCR have real power to investigate, adjudicate, and impose remedies.
Courts often defer to agency factual findings, unless clearly unreasonable.
ADA’s flexibility allows for a wide range of accommodations, but not every request is “reasonable.”
Agency adjudication offers quicker, lower-cost enforcement than court — especially for individuals.
💬 Quick Practice Check:
What role does the EEOC play in ADA enforcement before a case goes to court?
Can an agency like the DOT resolve ADA violations without filing a lawsuit?
What happens if an employer disagrees with an EEOC finding after adjudication?
RELATED Blog
0 comments