The U.S. Supreme Court recently delivered an 8-1 ruling that blocks retired Florida firefighter Karyn Stanley from pursuing legal action against her former employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Stanley had sought legal recourse after her health insurance was terminated post-retirement, a situation she argued was discriminatory based on her disability, Parkinson’s disease, diagnosed in 2016.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, delivering the opinion for the majority, emphasized the textual interpretation of the ADA, which prohibits employment discrimination against a “qualified individual” with a disability. A “qualified individual,” according to Gorsuch, is someone who can perform the essential duties of the job they hold or desire, indicating that the phrase does not extend to retirees such as Stanley. The full opinion can be read here.
While Justices John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett agreed with this interpretation, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. She argued that the ruling disregards the ADA’s intended protections for disabled workers’ retirement benefits.
The decision, as detailed on SCOTUSblog, also highlighted that although federal law may not offer recourse under these circumstances, other legal avenues may still be available, such as state laws and the Rehabilitation Act.
The verdict draws attention to possible legislative gaps in the ADA concerning retirement benefits for disabled workers and paves the way for future legal interpretations and potential amendments to address this issue. The ability of retirees to utilize the ADA against alleged discriminatory practices remains limited, pending any congressional amendments to extend coverage explicitly to retirees.