A recent ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reignited a legal battle for a California attorney, Benjamin Kohn, who alleges that the State Bar of California violated federal discrimination laws by failing to provide necessary accommodations during his bar examination. This decision mandates that Kohn’s case be revisited by a federal trial court to reassess whether the State Bar’s actions indeed contravened the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Kohn claims to suffer from multiple disabilities, including autism, digestive system disorders, and visual impairments, which purportedly required accommodations that were not provided by the State Bar during his examination. The Ninth Circuit ruled that the district court previously erred in its analysis when determining that the State Bar was protected by the state’s 11th Amendment immunity. The court emphasized that Title II of the ADA abrogates such immunity, suggesting that the protections for individuals with disabilities overrule the sovereign immunity typically afforded to state entities.
The Ninth Circuit’s ruling highlights the evolving judicial interpretations of the ADA in relation to state immunity, as well as the duty of state-operated licensing bodies to accommodate test-takers with disabilities. The court’s directive calls for a reevaluation of the factual circumstances under which the accommodations were denied to Kohn. This decision underscores the importance of accurately applying legal frameworks at trial, particularly when issues of accommodation and discrimination intersect with governmental immunities.
For further details on Kohn’s case and the Ninth Circuit’s rationale, the full text of the decision is accessible on Bloomberg Law.