History

• One of a series of laws that worked to prevent discrimination, the ADA included definitions of disabilities that have been diluted over time and through various court decisions. As the criteria for eligibility of coverage by the ADA have been made more stringent, Congress saw the need to reaffirm the definitions and standards.
  
  

Findings

• Section 2 of the act lists Congress' findings and problems that have necessitated the need for significant amendments to the original act. Two Supreme Court cases, Sutton v. United Air Lines Inc. (1999) and Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams (2002), limited the definition of disabilities as outlined in the ADA. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had also altered the standards originally set out in the ADA. Congress found that the EEOC's ADA regulations "defining the term 'substantially limits' as 'significantly restricted' are inconsistent with congressional intent, by expressing too high a standard." Congress found that the standard of coverage and protection it originally intended was not being followed.
  
  

Purpose

• The ADA Amendment Act was intended to reverse this line of thinking and return the standards to a level closer to their original vision. One of the purposes of the act is defined as strengthening the standards of who is protected by the ADA. The Supreme Court decisions, and similar ones in lower courts, have "created an inappropriately high level of limitation necessary to obtain coverage under the ADA." The ADA Amendment Act is concerned primarily with correcting this movement toward stricter, and more limiting, definitions of disabilities.
  
  

Features

• The ADA Amendment Act also addresses the issue of "mitigating measures," or devices or services that disabled people use as a consequence of their disability. This includes devices such as prosthetic limbs, implantable hearing devices, mobility devices or oxygen equipment. The seriousness of the impairment will be decided without consideration for the mitigating measures. In other words, having a device that assists with a disability does not eliminate the disability when considering eligibility for coverage by the ADA.
  
  

Effects

• The intended effect of the amendment is to restore the standards set in the original legislation. The gradual weakening of the original act's standards was so dramatic that, according to the United Federation of Teachers' newsletter for disabled members, in 2004 "workers lost 97 percent of the employment discrimination cases that went to trial."