Keywords: Americans with Disabilities Act, ADA, Supreme Court, American Civil Liberties Union, Congress, disabilities, disability, amendment

Related Disability Awareness Month Stories:

Terminology: What Should You Call a Person With a Disability?

Making the Workplace Accessible

How to Manage Disability at Work

Click here to read our "Things NEVER to Say to People With Disabilities" story.

Click here to read our "'But You Look So Good!' and 7 Other Things NOT to Say to a Person With a Non-Visible Disability" story.

Click here for a video: "Protecting Rights of People With Hearing Loss--What Does the Law Say?"

There's no denying that the battle to level the playing field for people with disabilities has been ongoing for decades. And while the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 protects some people with disabilities from employment discrimination, countless others, thanks to a narrow interpretation by the U.S. Supreme Court, still head to work with the looming threat of losing their job because of how their employer defines "disability."

"The Supreme Court misconstrued our intent," Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., who has spearheaded the effort to amend the act to be more inclusive, told The New York Times. "Our intent was to be inclusive. The definition of disability in this act shall be construed in favor of broad coverage."

Last year, the EEOC received 17,734 discrimination claims--up nearly 14 percent from 2006--and settled 15,708. But many say tighter interpretation of the law has made seeking protection increasingly difficult.

"The Supreme Court has slowly chipped away at [ADA] core protections, and as a result, the promise of equal employment is not currently extended to all people with disabilities," says Joanne Lin, legislative counsel with the Americans Civil Liberties Union's Washington Legislative Office.

The ADA currently defines an individual with a disability as a person who "has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; has a record of such an impairment; or is regarded as having such an impairment." But the narrow scope of the definition has made it increasingly hard for people with epilepsy, diabetes, cancer, multiple sclerosis and other diseases to claim protection under the act.

Last month, Congress unanimously passed, and President Bush signed, the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, which more clearly defines "disability." The new amendment states that a disability should "be constructed in favor of broad coverage" and that impairments in remission are also protected under the ADA. The bill also says that the courts may not consider "mitigating measures" such as prescription drugs or other remedies in cases involving disabilities.

In addition, the new bill also protects employees who are discriminated against because they are regarded as "having a disability."

"This is one of the most important pieces of civil-rights legislation of our time," Rep. Jim Langevin, D-R.I, who uses a wheelchair, told the Times.

Readers' Comments