You are here

Amicus Briefs

DRLC files amicus briefs on behalf of the disability community in order to educate  courts on points of law that are in doubt, to gather or organize information and to raise awareness about some aspect of the case that the court might otherwise miss. DRLC is not paid for this work. Examples of amicus briefs submitted by DRLC include:

  • Right to accommodations for immigrants with mental disabilities in deportation proceedings; Figueroa v. Gonzales at Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Line of Sight over standing spectators in stadiums; Miller v.Cal.Speedway Corp. at Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Right of children with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to reimbursement for private school placement without prior receipt of special education service; Forest Grove School v. TA at United States Supreme Court
  • Issue of whether landlords must take Section 8 vouchers as a reasonable accommodation. This is of particular concern for the disproportionate poverty of people with disabilities and the practical difficulties they face in finding housing both affordable and accessible. Sabi v. Donald Sterling, et al. at the California Court of Appeal
  • DRLC argues for the right of defense in capital cases to investigate a defendant’s history and symptoms of mental illness and to seek expert evaluation. Cullen v. Pinholster at the United States Supreme Court
  • DRLC argues with other disability activists to assert that Congress’ enactment of Title II allows plaintiffs with disabilities to seek damages against public entities. Goodman v. State of Georgia at the United States Supreme Court
  • DRLC argues that youth under 18 should not be sentenced to life without parole. The DRLC took a stand on this case because the plaintiffs were both individuals with disabilities and argued that a majority of youth sentenced to life without parole are, in fact, individuals with disabilities. Graham and Sullivan v. State of Florida at the United States Supreme Court 
  • DRLC argues that a child born through artificial insemination after the death of the parent due to cancer is entitled to benefits from the parent’s social security.  Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, v. Capato, et.al. at the United States Supreme Court
  • DRLC joined in support of respondents in favor of affirming the constitutionality of the Medicaid Expansion Provisions of the Affordable Care Act. State of Florida, v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services at the Supreme Court of the United States
  • Argued that the attorneys’ fees provision of the IDEA is critical to empowering families of children with disabilities to pursue litigation to protect their children’s right to a free and appropriate public education. T.B. v. San Diego Unified School District at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
  •  DRLC argued that drastically reduced funding for California's In-Home Support Services violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and will lead to illness, physical and mental deterioration, injury, and ultimately institutionalization for over 375,000 Californians.  Oster, et. al v. Lightbourne, et. al at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals