Demand Our Access

This is a special episode of the Demand Our Access podcast. In this episode, I describe my journey with emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. I also describe my personal advocacy to ensure my local area has emergency preparedness plans and operations that are accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities.

This episode was a very special one in the history of the Demand Our Access podcast because it was the first time I was joined by a guest. Erin Taylor from Upstream Access joined me to discuss emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. I was thrilled to have Erin join me because she is one of the people doing the most to ensure those of us with disabilities are prepared when emergencies strike. Among other things, Erin and I discussed Person-Centered Emergency Preparedness (P-CEP) a program developed in Australia and brought to America by Erin and Upstream Access. P-CEP is a program that certifies people in assisting disabled people in developing our individual emergency preparedness plans. Currently, I’m getting certified in P-CEP. If, after listening to the interview, I would appreciate your feedback on dedicating an episode to P-CEP.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, we will be discussing emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. Specifically, I will explain why emergency preparedness is the most important issue we could ever advocate for, review what state and local governments are required to do to ensure their emergency preparedness is accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities. After the review, we will use scenarios to see how we can advocate with our state and local governments to work with them on making their emergency preparedness accessible to and inclusive of us. Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, February seventh at two Eastern. I believe we will be continuing our look at emergency preparedness during that episode. We may even have a guest join us. I will keep you updated through the Demand Our Access website. Reviewing Accessible and Inclusive Emergency Preparedness Why This Really Matters Emergency preparedness is the most important issue we will advocate for with our state and local governments. Not being able to access web content matters. Not being able to apply for jobs matters. Not being able to enter buildings matters. Not having interpreters if you need them matters. Emergency preparedness is literally life or death. If we die in an emergency because our state and local government didn’t properly accommodate us, it won’t matter to us if a website is inaccessible, or if we can access a building. Since there are very few advocacy efforts addressing emergency preparedness, and because most state and local governments hardly comply with the ADA to begin with, the odds are extremely high that if a disaster took place in your community people with disabilities would die deaths that would have been preventable had your state and local government followed their legal requirements and ensured their emergency planning was accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities. If we want to ensure we don’t die a preventable death when an emergency hits our communities, we must advocate with our governments for accessible and inclusive emergency planning and response. If you are one of those people who doesn’t believe government could or should have a role in your protection during an emergency, I want to ask you to consider what happens when an emergency requires you to evacuate your home and the government’s notice is inaccessible to you? What happens if you are required to evacuate but there is no accessible way for you to evacuate? What if you are required to evacuate to an inaccessible shelter? Issues like these and many more can and must be addressed by proper emergency preparedness on the part of our state and local governments. Introduction to Emergency Preparedness Six years ago I found two resources that have profoundly influenced my interest in emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies released an after action report in May of 2018 detailing widespread governmental failure to properly plan for people with disabilities as a part of emergency preparedness. The report made numerous suggestions as to how emergency preparedness could be more inclusive of people with disabilities while illustrating how ineffective planning led to preventable death, injury, and illness. Appendix G of the after action report has a detailed discussion of the limitations of additional needs registries. Additional needs registries became somewhat popular among state and local governments in the 1990s as a reported way to ensure people with disabilities got assistance during emergencies. The report from The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies found too few people register, the registries do not guarantee help but planners count on them, knowing someone’s home and/or work address does not mean you know where they are in a disaster, and far better data is available. The Department of Homeland Security conducted several listening sessions on emergency preparedness and people with disabilities. The listening sessions also detailed widespread governmental failure at all levels to adequately pla

This is the recording from the October 18,2025 live episode. In this episode, we had a good discussion about how to advocate for our rights in private housing situations when the landlord or property manager knows nothing about the rights we have under the Fair Housing Act. To make this easier to follow, the content has been edited to remove the breaks and pauses. All of the discussion that took place during the episode is part of this recording.

In this episode, I tried something new. I began with a brief recap of our rights under the Fair Housing Act in private housing situations. Then, I posed some scenarios to the people listening live in Zoom and we had interactive discussions as to how we could advocate for our rights under the fictional scenarios. Note, I haven’t yet figured out how to make a transcript of these kids of recordings. So, I don’t know how to yet make them accessible to people with hearing disabilities. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am briefly introducing the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and its amendments. Since this is intended to be an introduction to the FHA, I will only be covering the protections afforded people based on disability status in this episode. If we continue this discussion in future episodes, I would be happy to discuss the protections based on other protected classes. Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, September sixth. As of now, I’m not sure what I will cover in that episode. If there is interest in more about the Fair Housing Act, let me know. Citations As always, I will not be providing citations to sections of law during this episode. But the citations will be provided when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Introducing The Fair Housing Act Since I have not yet covered the Fair Housing Act (FHA) through Demand Our Access, this episode is intended to be a brief introduction to the FHA. I’m keeping this introduction brief, because I want to gage interest from the community in the subject of fair housing. If there is interest in diving deeper into housing discrimination, I’m very open to continuing this discussion into future episodes. Since this is a brief introduction, I have sought to keep the explanations at a very high-level. If we continue the housing discrimination discussion in future episodes, I will take deeper dives into specifics based on your feedback. I’m trying this new approach to introducing new subjects to see if community will assist me in planning what subjects are covered and how they are covered. I’m also hoping that by breaking things into smaller pieces they will be more relatable. With that explanatory information out of the way, let’s begin our introduction to the Fair Housing Act. Roadmap In this episode, I will be covering the following five topics: Brief history of the Fair Housing Act Intent of the Fair Housing Act Enforcement agencies Protected Classes and Scope Impact on People with Disabilities Brief History The Fair Housing Act (FHA) was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on April 11, 1968, one week after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. When it became law, the FHA was added as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The original statute barred housing discrimination in terms of race, color, religion, and national origin. In 1974, the FHA was amended to add sex as a protected class. In 1988, the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), added familial status and disability as protected classes when it comes to housing. The FHAA also added accessibility requirements that applied to newly constructed multi-family dwellings of four or more units intended to be occupied after March 13, 1991 to include certain accessibility features. Those accessibility features include: an accessible entrance on an accessible route; accessible common and public use areas; doors wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair; and more. The FHAA also granted the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) additional enforcement powers through the introduction of administrative hearings, civil penalties, and expanded judicial remedies. The FHAA transformed the Fair Housing Act from being a law that was largely symbolic to a law that would actually try to provide protections to those facing housing discrimination through meaningful enforcement. In 1995, the Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA) provided criteria for 55+ and 62+ housing and modified the familial status provisions of the FHA. In 2021, HUD issued a directive covering gender and sexual identity under the FHA’s provision barring sex-based discrimination. Not to get too political, but I think most of us understand that today HUD is not likely to follow the 2021 directive. Intent of the FHA The FHA became law with the promise of eliminating housing discrimination and to promote more integrated, inclusive communities. It prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, financing, advertising, or zoning of housing on the bases of protected class. The protected classes under the FHA are: Race Color National origin Religion Sex (including ge

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Preliminary Information Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode Since the ACB convention is the first week in July and given that our family has a lot happening in July, I will not be doing a live episode of Demand Our Access in July. So, the next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, August second. As of now, I don’t know what topic I will cover in August. As always, I’m open to your ideas. Updating the Website Since I won’t be doing any live episodes during the month of July, I will be working on updating the Demand Our Access website. I will have more information about the updated website and maybe even demo it in August. Complaints Under Title II Introduction As a reminder, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II), primarily covers state and local governments. I have mentioned complaints under Title II in previous episodes. But this time I will be taking a deeper dive into complaints under Title II. I’m doing that because I think it is more important than ever for us to understand our options for filing complaints under Title II and the rights we have in filing directly with our state or local government. Citations Again, I will not be mentioning citations to sections of law during this episode. I will post the citations to the specific sections of law when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Public Entities As a reminder, Title II often confers responsibilities to what the law calls “public entities.” In general, public entities are an entire local government or individual sections of a local government. Sometimes, different responsibilities under the law apply to public entities depending on whether or not they employ at least 50 employees. To keep this simple, I will, most of the time, refer to local governments (not public entities). The rights we have and the responsibilities the government must meet will be the same. The technical differences in what defines a public entity don’t change our rights as disabled people. Roadmap In this episode, I will cover the following five topics: General complaint information Filing complaints with your local government Filing complaints with Federal Agencies Filing Complaints with the Department of Justice Tips on filing complaints General Complaint Information Where you Can File When a local government is discriminating against you based on your status as a disabled person, you can file your complaint in one of three places: The local government that is discriminating against you A federal agency that oversees the program that is the basis of your complaint With the Department of Justice (DOJ) You are not limited to filing in only one of the three places; for example, you could file both with your state or local government and with DOJ. Time Periods for Filing One important thing to remember is the time periods in which you must file. Complaints filed with DOJ or a federal agency must be filed within 180 days of the alleged discrimination. State and local governments, on the other hand, can require that complaints under Title II be filed within 60 days of the alleged discrimination. When facing discrimination, it is a very good idea to figure out your local government’s complaint procedures (if any), because you may need to file within 60 days of the events comprising the discrimination. Who can File You don’t have to be the person who actually experienced the disability discrimination in order to file a complaint. As long as you have the permission of the disabled person or you are their guardian, you can file a complaint under Title II. If you are so inclined, you can also file a complaint on behalf of a class of disabled people. But that’s something most people won’t try. So, I’ll leave it there. Filing with a State or Local Government Notice of Rights Under Title II, public entities are required to notify those of us with disabilities of, among other things, of our right to file a complaint with them when we believe they are violating our rights under Title II. In this case, I have used the term “public entity” because I have seen situations where a state or local government has adopted a general framework for complaint

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Preliminary Information Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next live episode will take place on Saturday June 21 at 2:00 PM Eastern time. Unless something changes, I will be diving deeply into complaints under Title II in that episode. Since I’m expecting to be preempted by the ACB convention during the first week in July, and with some things that will be happening with our family during the month of July, I will be taking the month of July off from the Demand Our Access podcast. So, after the June 21st episode, there will not be another episode until August. Maintenance of Accessibility Features, Assistive Mobility Devices, and Existing Facilities Under Title II Introduction In this episode, I am continuing my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). As a reminder, Title II primarily covers state and local governments. In this episode, I will be covering topics I haven’t covered before as a part of the Demand Our Access project. So, I will not be discussing effective communication, service animals, general prohibitions against discrimination, and other topics previously covered. For information about those topics, please check out the episodes previously posted to the Demand Our Access website. During the month of July, I will be updating the website so that the page on Title II links to the episodes I think will help you best understand Title II. In this episode, I am also not covering topics that primarily tell state and local governments how to comply with Title II. The Roadmap section will tell you exactly what will be covered in this episode. Citations Again, I will not be mentioning citations to sections of law during this episode. I will post the citations to the specific sections of law when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Public Entities As a reminder, Title II often confers responsibilities to what the law calls “public entities.” In general, public entities are an entire local government or individual sections of a local government. Sometimes, different responsibilities under the law apply to public entities depending on whether or not they employ at least 50 employees. To keep this simple, I will, most of the time, refer to local governments (not public entities). The rights we have and the responsibilities the government must meet will be the same. The technical differences in what defines a public entity don’t change our rights as disabled people. Roadmap In this episode, I will be covering the following three topics: Maintenance of Accessible Features Assistive mobility devices Existing Facilities Since I have decided, where possible, to title this episode and future episodes with the topics to be addressed, I may not include the roadmap section in future episodes. I included the roadmap section here, because I wanted it to be consistent with the previous episodes on revisiting Title II. Maintenance of Accessibility Features Defining Accessibility Features Accessibility features are those facilities and equipment necessary for a local government to provide access to its activities, programs, and services to those of us with disabilities. This means that things like elevators provided to enable people with disabilities to move between floors are required to be maintained in working order. Electronic door openers are also examples of accessibility features that must be maintained in proper working order. There are only two things you need to know about local governments being required to maintain accessibility features: Local governments are required to maintain in operable and working condition those features of facilities and equipment that are required to be readily accessible and usable by people with disabilities. This section does not prohibit isolated or temporary interruptions of access or service due to maintenance or repairs. If a local government installs automatic door openers to assist people with disabilities in opening the heavy doors at city hall, the local government must ensure the electronic door openers are maintained in working condition. While it may be reasonable for a service interruption to last for a day or two if the electronic door

In this episode, Desiree and I discuss those terrible accessibility overlays that promise to make websites more accessible while actually doing little to improve accessibility. As Desiree’s demonstration shows, these overlays are hard to use, don’t behave consistently, and provide little in the way of greater access.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am continuing my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). As a reminder, Title II primarily covers state and local governments. In this episode, I will be covering topics I haven’t covered before as a part of the Demand Our Access project. So, I will not be discussing effective communication and service animals. For information about those topics, please check out the episodes previously posted to the Demand Our Access website. In this episode, I am also not covering topics that primarily tell state and local governments how to comply with Title II. The Roadmap section will tell you exactly what will be covered in this episode. Comments and Questions As always, I want to hear from you. To share your comments and questions about the material covered in this episode, or general thoughts about Demand Our Access, you can contact me by completing the contact form on the Demand Our Access website. If you would rather email, send your message to [email protected]. Citations To make the material easier to follow, I will not provide citations to sections of law. The links to the relevant sections of law will be included when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Roadmap In this episode, I will cover the following topics: Discrimination prohibited Illegal use of drugs Retaliation and coercion Personal mobility devices and personal services Continuing Our Look at Title II Discrimination Prohibited Even though the discrimination that is prohibited under Title II is largely in the law to tell state and local governments what they should be doing as a starting point for complying with Title II, it’s important for us (as disabled people) to understand what our local governments are supposed to be doing to include us. The material in this section is a bit dense. So, I have tried to summarize it in a way that communicates what you should know while leaving out a lot of legal language. Qualified Person with a Disability The definition of a qualified person with a disability is found in the Definitions section of Title II. I’m including here, because the Discrimination Prohibited section repeatedly references qualified people with disabilities. Defining a Qualified Person with a Disability Qualified individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity. I know I said I wouldn’t include a lot of legal language, and I generally will not. I included the exact definition of a qualified person with a disability because it’s a definable term that’s used throughout Title II. All of that legal language can be simplified down to this: A qualified person with a disability is a person with a disability who, with or without an accommodation or modification, can participate in the activity or program they wish to join. If you want to swim and there are no physical limitations associated with your being able to swim, you are a qualified person with a disability for the purposes of taking swimming lessons. You are qualified to take swimming lessons even if you need an accommodation to take swimming lessons. No Disability Exclusion A state or local government cannot, based on our being disabled, prevent us from participating in its programs, nor may it deny us the benefits of its services. This is true even if the program in which we choose to participate or if the service we wish to benefit from is administered completely by a third party or jointly between our government and a third party. If your local government contracts with a company to provide its water bills, the water bills they provide must be accessible. The government cannot say that they aren’t responsible for the inaccessible bill because they contracted with a company to process them. 4Types of Discrimination In order to stay away from things that may be confusing, I’m not going to cover all the types of discrimination listed; instead, I’m going to focus on the ones I believe are most likely to be encountered by you in your dealings with your local government. Affo

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In the last episode of the Demand Our Access podcast, I discussed Texas v. Becerra, a lawsuit seeking to have Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) declared unconstitutional. If you want to learn more about the lawsuit, please listen to that episode or read the transcript of what I said about the lawsuit. During the questions and comments portion of that episode, there was a lot of interest in advocating for the protection of Section 504. So, this episode will present strategies those of you living in the 17 states can take to try to protect Section 504 and things those of us who don’t live in one of those 17 states can do to be heard. Before discussing how we can advocate to protect Section 504, I will discuss the next episode and let you know how you can contact me. The Next Live Episode The next live episode will take place on Saturday, April sixth at 2:00 PM EDT. In that episode, I am planning to continue my revisited look at Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, primarily covering state and local governments. Comments and Questions If you have any comments and/or questions about the Demand Our Access project, you can fill out the contact form on the Demand Our Access website or you can email me at [email protected]. How You Can Advocate for Section 504 If You Live in One of the 17 States As a reminder, the 17 states suing to have Section 504 declared unconstitutional are as follows: Alabama Alaska Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Iowa Kansas Louisiana Missouri Montana Nebraska South Carolina South Dakota Texas Utah West Virginia Contacting Your Attorney General If you live in one of the 17 states, the best thing you can do is contact your attorney general and let them know why you support Section 504 and that you want them to withdraw from the lawsuit. In order to make contacting your attorney general easier, I have worked with ChatGPT to create a table of contact information for the 17 attorneys general involved in the lawsuit. The table provides the name, mailing address, phone number, and website for each attorney general. I didn’t include an email address and/or contact form, because those methods of contact weren’t consistent enough among the attorneys general for them to be easily included in a table. if you would rather send an email or complete a contact form, visit your attorney general’s website to see how you can do that. I’m not going to read the names of the attorneys general and their individual contact information. The table of contact information will be provided at the end of the transcript when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. What to Say Obviously, you should voice your support in a way that is comfortable for you and that reflects your voice. So, I can’t tell you exactly what to say when contacting your attorney general. Also, I can’t provide a different script for every possible method of communication you may use to contact your attorney general. So, I have developed a short sample script that works whether you contact your attorney general over the phone, through email, by using a contact form, by writing a letter, or even if you meet them. Before providing the script, I want to make one important point: the more personal your appeal the more likely it is to be heard. That doesn’t mean you should provide health information or anything else that you typically don’t provide strangers. What it means is that the more you can demonstrate how Section 504 has personally helped you, the more impactful your support of Section 504 will be when offered to your attorney general. I say that because attorneys general hear from lots of people every day. Much of what they receive is from people who are simply regurgitating what one organization or another has told them to say by providing a template or sample script. While that will be what you will also be doing, you can make your support of Section 504 more impactful by adding some of your personal experience with Section 504 to what I will provide here. In my view, the more personal information about how Section 504 has been a positive in your life really matters in this case because your attorney general doesn’t understand the benefits to those of us with disabilities that have been gained as a result of Section 504. Even worse, they believe it shouldn’t exist. This means convincing them to s

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode I will be covering the lawsuit threatening Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504). Sharing my Feelings Usually, I try to avoid my personal feelings when I discuss the law as a part of Demand Our Access. In preparing this episode, I had an impossible time fully separating my feelings of anger and hurt from the material I’m presenting. Given the reality that if the states are successful all of us with disabilities will have significantly fewer civil rights, I’m hoping you can understand why some of my feelings and opinions have made their way into this material. Before discussing Section 504 I will briefly describe the next episode and provide my contact information. The Next Episode The next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, March 15. In that episode, I will continue my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Questions and Comments As always, I’m interested in hearing from you. Please provide any feedback by completing the contact form on the Demand Our Access website or by emailing me at [email protected]. The Threat to Section 504 Briefly Describing Section 504 So we all understand the potential magnitude of this lawsuit, I want to briefly describe Section 504’s history and what it covers. As mentioned earlier, Section 504 is a section of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. The regulations implementing Section 504 were not published by the Department of Health and Human Services until 1977, after the protests addressed in the documentary Crip Camp. Simply put, Section 504 applies to programs of the federal government and programs receiving money from the federal government. This means that Section 504 currently provides legal protections to those of us with disabilities in all public programs offered by the federal government and all programs receiving any funding from the federal government. For more information about Section 504, check out the episode titled Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Texas v. Becerra On September 26, 2024, a group of 17 states led by Texas filed suit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in the Northern District of Texas. The currently named defendant in the suit is Xavior Becerra (the secretary of HHS during the Biden administration). This is why the lawsuit is currently referred to as Texas v. Becerra. Note, the link to the complaint filed by the 17 states posted to the Demand Our Access website when this episode of the podcast is posted goes to a reasonably accessible PDF on the Texas attorney general’s website. Participating States The 17 states participating in the lawsuit are as follows: Alabama Alaska Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Iowa Kansas Louisiana Missouri Montana Nebraska South Carolina South Dakota Texas Utah West Virginia Things to Know About the Lawsuit To, hopefully, not get too technical, I want to briefly cover the seven major aspects of the complaint filed by the 17 states. After briefly highlighting the important aspects of the complaint, I will delve into more specifics about some of them. I have organized the list of seven things you currently need to know about the lawsuit in a way that, I hope, addresses questions in an order most of you may be thinking about them: In a status report filed with the court on February 19, the Department of Justice, which has not yet said how it will participate in the lawsuit, and the 17 states asked for a pause in the cases timeline. Despite previous reporting, all 17 states that initially joined the lawsuit are still participating. The lawsuit seeks to have Section 504 declared unconstitutional. The lawsuit wants the rules developed by the Biden administration to further codify how Section 504 applies to health care providers dismissed. A lot of the complaint mentions how the HHS rules will affect Medicaid. The complaint seeks to limit the so-called integration of those of us with disabilities into community programs. Much of the language in the complaint focuses on HHS’s determination that gender dysphoria is covered under Section 504 and that people with gender dysphporia are protected by Section 504. The Unconstitutionality of Section 504 Since this is not an episode about constitutional law, I’m not going to dive deeply into constitutional arguments. Here, my goal is to provide a basic amount of educat

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. The Next Episode The next episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, March first. In that episode, I will continue our second look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). If you have any questions or comments about this episode or Demand Our Access in General, I would love to hear from you. You can email me at [email protected]. You can also complete the contact form on the Demand Our Access website. Introduction Title II primarily sets forth the requirements state and local governments are supposed to follow to ensure their activities, programs, and services are accessible to those of us with disabilities. Unfortunately, their isn’t a single state or local government complying with Title II. Even worse, most state and local governments are demonstrably out of compliance with Title II. This deliberate noncompliance with Title II on the part of every state and local government adds to the discrimination faced by those of us with disabilities on a daily basis. Since we all need to interact with our state and local government, their lack of compliance with Title II causes us lots of stress and difficulty. For those reasons, I chose Title II to be the first topic I discussed through the Demand Our Access podcast. Over the last roughly 2.5 years, I hope my ability to teach important legal concepts has improved. So, I thought it would be good if I revisited Title II now. Much of the substance covered here will be very similar to what was covered more than two years ago. But I am, hopefully, presenting the information in a way that makes it easier to understand. Episode Roadmap I am covering these topics in this episode because they are the foundation of compliance under Title II. In the next episode, I will cover more of the information you will need to effectively request an accommodation or modification from your state or local government. If terms like accommodation and modification don’t mean anything to you now, they should when I finish our revisited two-part look at Title II. Below are the eight topics I will cover in this episode: Code of Federal Regulations Defining a Public Entity Project Civic Access ADA coordinator Notice of rights Grievance procedure Self-evaluation Transition plan Title II Revisited Code of Federal Regulations Laws don’t often contain all their legal requirements. Congress regularly directs federal agencies to develop or promulgate what the law will require. Under the ADA, several federal agencies have responsibility for developing guidance as to what it means to comply with the ADA. When an agency has responsibility for clarifying what compliance with section(s) of the ADA means, they have enforcement power over those section(s). The Department of Justice (DOJ) has primary responsibility for establishing what guidelines for compliance under title II. DOJ also has primary enforcement power over Title II. When a federal agency establishes what constitutes compliance, those requirements are published in the Code of Federal regulations. When I cite to a section of law (either during the episodes or on the website) I will almost always be citing to the Code of Federal Regulations. Often, the Code of Federal Regulations is referred to as C.F.R. When I refer to a section of C.F.R, I’m referring to a section in the Code of Federal Regulations. For the rest of this episode, I’m not going to mention any section in the Code of Federal Regulations. I’m not mentioning specific sections of the Code of Federal Regulations here, because I have realized mentioning the citations is very distracting for listeners. Even though I won’t mention the citations to the Code of Federal Regulations, they will be provided when the text of this episode and this accompanying audio file are posted to the Demand Our Access website as a podcast episode. Defining a Public Entity A public entity is defined in 28 C.F.R. § 34.104. Section 35.104 is the list of definitions under the ADA. The definition of public entity has three parts: any state or local government any department, special purpose district, or instrumentality of state, states, or local government the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and other commuter authorities All public entities with at least 50 employees should appoint their own ADA coordinator and have their own grievance procedure. Most local governments, if they have an ADA coordinator at all, d

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction This episode has two main topics: advocacy updates from Desiree and I; and playing the blind card while advocating. The next live episode will take place on February 15 at 2:00 EST. I don’t yet have a planned topic for that episode. If you have any comments and/or suggestions, please write me at [email protected] or complete the contact form at Demand Our Access. Advocacy Updates From Desiree and I My Advocacy Updates While I can’t yet discuss everything I’m working on, I want to mention my complaint with the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), and issues I’m having with the Oregon Employment Department (OED). My EEOC Complaint The EEOC has accepted my charge of discrimination and notified my former employer. While awaiting their response, I have decided that, if they agree, I will attempt to resolve my discrimination through mediation run by the EEOC. I have made the choice to try mediation, even though I doubt it will be successful, because mediation could bring about a much faster result. Also, there is the reality that the current administration is seemingly considerably less likely to litigate cases of disability discrimination. But even if they don’t, I still have hope that the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry, which has a partnership agreement with the EEOC, will investigate if mediation fails. My Issues with the Oregon Employment Department After trying for more than a month, I made the difficult decision to stop seeking additional unemployment benefits. The truth is that constantly fighting for the access I need to consistently get the unemployment benefits I’m entitled to receive from an agency with little to no knowledge of its legal responsibilities under Title I and no desire to meaningfully provide the accommodations I’m entitled to receive from them was causing me tremendous stress. So, I have begun the process of trying to force them to follow the law by filing with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry. At this point, I don’t believe the Department of Justice will assist me. So, I hope I can, at least, make it so the next blind person needing accommodations from OED to get the benefits they deserve doesn’t suffer the amount of discrimination I have suffered. Desiree’s Traveling with a Service Animal As you may know, Desiree has a new guide dog. While you are listening to this, she is in Florida at a conference. Prior to flying to Florida, she had to complete the forms necessary to fly with a service animal. What you are about to hear is the inaccessibility she encountered while completing the required forms. In her recording, Desiree mentioned the company Open Doors that enables you to register your service animal with five different airlines. Playing the Blind Card Introduction to Playing the Blind Card While I’m calling what I am talking about here the blind card, it’s important to note that the analysis I will share here applies to all situations where a disabled person uses stereotypes and assumptions about disabled people and those of us with disabilities to encourage nondisabled people to make something more accessible. Obviously, what I’m sharing here is strictly my opinion. I recognize and appreciate others will disagree. I’m sharing this anyway to hopefully stimulate thought and provoke what I believe is an important discussion. The last episode of the Demand Our Access podcast focused on how we can advocate during these difficult political times. During the question and comment portion of the live version of the podcast, the issue of playing the blind card while advocating was raised a couple of times. Since I never play the blind card, I thought I would take some time to explain my personal opposition to playing the blind card while advocating. Why I Never Play the Blind Card I never use the negative stereotypes and negative assumptions many sighted people have about blindness and those of us who are blind when I’m advocating is that feeding on those stereotypes and assumptions continues the disrespect, whether understood or not, by the sighted person of me and the rest of us who are blind. Simply put, if someone believes blind people are less capable, believes we deserve credit for doing everyday tasks that are easy for them but which they incorrectly assume are more difficult for us than they are, or develops (whether encouraged or not) a feeli

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Briefly Explaining Accessibility Overlays So we are all on the same page, I want to briefly describe the kinds of overlays involved here. Several companies, including AccessiBe, have been marketing overlays to government agencies, businesses, and nonprofits. In marketing these overlays, these companies, including AccessiBe, are selling the myth that installing these overlays will make websites fully compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). The idea is that if these overlays are used, websites will fully comply with WCAG and the websites will be fully accessible. As anyone who uses assistive technologies knows, these overlays don’t make websites fully usable to those of us who use assistive technologies. As the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mentions in its document explaining the proposed consent agreement discussed soon, AccessiBe’s Access Widget doesn’t even create compliance with WCAG. How you can Comment on the Proposed Fine of AccessiBe Explaining AccessiBe AccessiBe is an Israeli company that develops and sells what it calls AccessWidget. AccessiBe has been promoting the idea that all companies, government agencies, and nonprofits need to do to is install AccessWidget and their websites will be accessible to everyone. Currently, AccessiBe’s website boasts that more than 100K websites have been made accessible to everyone through the use of AccessWidget. The current price for using AccessWidget is $490 annually for sites with less than 1,000 pages. For websites with less than 10,000 pages and for premium add-ons, the current annual cost for AccessWidget is $1,400. For sites with less than 100,000 pages and for premium add-ons, the current annual cost is $3,490. The FTC’s Fine On January sixth, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed consent agreement with AccessiBe and asked for public comment. Under the terms of the proposed consent agreement, AccessiBe would be fined $1 million for alleged violations of law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Speaking about AccessiBe’s actions, the FTC’s analysis of the proposed consent agreement says the following: This matter involves AccessiBe’s marketing and sale of a web accessibility software plug in called AccessWidget. AccessiBe represented that AccessWidget could make any website compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”), a comprehensive set of technical criteria used to assess website accessibility. AccessiBe advertised these claims on its website and social media, as well as in articles that were formatted as impartial and objective reviews on third-party websites. AccessiBe also failed to disclose its material connections with the publishers of those third-party articles. The proposed complaint alleges that AccessWidget did not make all websites WCAG compliant, and that the company’s claims were false, misleading, or unsubstantiated. The proposed complaint also alleges that formatting the third-party articles and reviews as independent opinions by impartial authors and publishers was false and misleading, and that AccessiBe’s failure to disclose its material connections with the publishers of those articles was deceptive. The proposed order contains provisions designed to prevent AccessiBe from engaging in these and similar acts and practices in the future. Provision I prohibits AccessiBe from representing that its automated products, including accessWidget’s artificial intelligence and other automated technology, can make any website WCAG compliant, or can ensure continued compliance with WCAG over time as web content changes, unless the company has competent and reliable evidence to support the representations. Provision II prohibits AccessiBe from misrepresenting any fact material to consumers about any of the company’s products or services, such as the value or total cost; any material restrictions, limitations, or conditions; or any material aspect of its performance, features, benefits, efficacy, nature, or central characteristics. Provision III prohibits AccessiBe from misrepresenting that statements made in third-party reviews, articles, or blog posts about its automated products, including accessWidget’s artificial intelligence and other automated technology, are independent opinions by impartial authors; that an endorser is an independent or ordinary user of the automated product; or that the endorser is a

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction Without getting too political, I think most people would agree that advocating for civil rights will not be the same under the incoming Trump administration as it has been under the Biden administration. That being said, I strongly believe that advocating for our rights, even if you don’t believe our advocacy efforts will be as successful, is even more important than maybe it has ever been. I say that because if the Trump administration is serious about cutting programs that provide greater access and inclusion, one of the best ways we can defend the programs we need is to demonstrate how many things still aren’t working. To put it another way: if very few people are requesting accommodations or modifications, or asking government to enforce violations, the easier it will be for officials to argue that our civil rights programs aren’t needed. Before getting into how we can advocate for our rights during the second Trump administration, I think it’s important to provide some reminders as to what actually happened during the first Trump administration and how little we are on his mind: The first Trump administration made no real effort to repeal or seriously weaken the ADA and related laws. Trump almost never talks about the ADA and those of us with disabilities. He has not promised to reduce the rights of those of us with disabilities. Trump wouldn’t get many political points by launching an attack against the disability community and/or by threatening to destroy the access we currently have. I shared those reminders because I believe the first Trump administration, at least when it comes to the civil rights of those of us with disabilities, is a good indicator of what the second Trump administration will be like for our advocacy efforts. As you may remember, the first Trump administration did basically nothing to improve access for those of us with disabilities. But it didn’t go out of its way to destroy the gains we have made prior to Trump taking office for the first time. Currently, that is what I expect to happen beginning on January 20. Since I don’t expect our concerns to be taken seriously, we need to begin our look at advocating during the second Trump administration by considering how we can advocate for our rights outside of the Department of Justice, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the rest of the federal agencies with oversight over our civil rights laws. Advocating for Our Rights Under the Second Trump Administration A key to our advocacy efforts under the second Trump administration will be using the state and local laws that provide us similar protections to those we have under the ADA at the federal level. How effective advocacy efforts will be at the state and local level will depend, in part, on how seriously your state and/or local government takes the civil rights of those of us with disabilities. So, everyone’s mileage will not be the same. But everyone, except those of you living in Alabama, has a state law promising civil rights protections to disabled people. Obviously, I cannot cover the 49 state laws that provide protections to those of us with disabilities on this podcast. In the recording, I discussed a table listing the state-specific laws. I was not able to publish that table to the site, because I am having issues with the way WordPress is interpreting the HTML for the post with the table. In case you consider your state’s law, I want to give you a few important reminders: No state law can provide us fewer protections than we get from the ADA and related laws. States are allowed to provide greater and different protections than are provided by the ADA. Most of the state laws providing us civil rights protections are very similar to the protections provided by the ADA. Some states offer protections of our civil rights when it comes to education. Some states offer protection of our civil rights when it comes to financial issues. Some states offer protection of our civil rights when it comes to housing. Only a few states directly call out protections similar to those offered by Title II of the ADA (covering the activities, programs, and services of local governments). Most state laws address the protections offered by Titles I and III of the ADA (covering employment and businesses and nonprofits respectively). Advocating Under Title I and Your State’s Law As you most likely know, The Eq

My Mastodon Handle In case anyone is interested, I joined Mastodon. My handle is @[email protected]. All of the posts I make to the Demand Our Access website will automatically be shared to my Mastodon account. I look forward to meeting you on Mastodon. Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I will briefly recap Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title I) before discussing steps you should take in case you face discrimination at work. If you have any comments or questions about this episode, you can complete the contact form on the Demand Our Access website, or you can email me at [email protected]. For more information about Title I, visit the page called ADA Title I Information. If you are concerned as to how recent political events will affect the ability of people with disabilities to have concerns of discrimination addressed by the federal government, I will be covering that in the next episode. That episode will be live on ACB Community on Saturday, December seventh at 2:00 PM EST. It will be posted to Demand Our access shortly after it is presented live. As I have said several times before, there is no way to cover this kind of material without using words like "impaired" that many of us in the disability community don’t use. I’m using words like "impaired" here because those are the words used in the law. Whether we like it or not, when communicating about the law we are required to use terms that are outdated. Maybe someday the ADA will be revisited and the updated law will provide for meaningful enforcement and be written in modern language. For now, we have to discuss the law as it has been written. Briefly Recapping Title I Our brief recap of Title I is based on the rules defining compliance with Title I as set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 29 C.F.R. § 1630. To make this presentation easier to follow, I’m not going to mention the exact citations to different sections of the Code of Federal Regulations. If you are interested in the citations, you can find them in the episodes where I discussed Title I. I decided that the term "covered entity", while used in the Code of Federal Regulations, may be too confusing for people just learning about Title I. So, I have decided to replace the term "covered entity" with the term "employer". While I’m doing this to make the presentation easier to follow, it must be remembered that not all employers are covered by Title I; for example, if an employer employs fewer than 15 employees that employer is not covered by Title I. If you heard either of the episodes where I discussed Title I in greater detail, some of this will be review for you. I have included what I believe are some of the most important things to know about our rights under Title I here so if someone listens to this episode prior to listening to the episodes on Title I, some of the information they will need is here. Important Concepts For an employer to be covered byTitle I, it must have at least 15 employees. The United States government is not subject to the provisions of Title I; however, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides similar protections for federal positions. To be clear, state and local governments are covered by Title I. If you work or you are interested in working for a state or local government, what I am covering here applies to you. Private membership clubs (excluding labor organizations) are not covered by Title I. Religious institutions are covered by Title I. But they may give preference to people of their religion. Members of the clergy and people perform essentially religious functions are excluded from the protections of Title I. Discrimination Prohibited It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of disability against a qualified individual in regard to the following: Recruitment, advertising, and job application procedures Hiring, upgrading, promotion, award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, right of return from layoff and rehiring Rates of pay or any other form of compensation and changes in compensation Job assignments, job classifications, organizational structures, position descriptions, lines of progression, and seniority lists Leaves of absence, sick leave, or any other leave Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the employer. Selection an

Introduction As the title indicates, this episode is about using artificial intelligence (AI) to advocate for our legal rights and to learn more about the law. Specifically, I demonstrate using AI to find who to contact when you need to make an ADA request of your local government, having AI draft the substance of an ADA request, and using AI to learn more about the law. All demonstrations were done using ChatGPT. Since some people don’t want to pay for ChatGPT, I demonstrate these tasks in the free version too. Important Notes on ChatGPT ChatGPT is a tool that can make doing things faster and more efficient. ChatGPT makes mistakes. Don’t use it to do important work for you unless you can check its results. For making an ADA request, ChatGPT doesn’t need to be perfect. It only needs to communicate the basics of a request. The paid version of ChatGPT provides much better, faster responses than does the free version. The free version will make developing an accommodations request easier, especially if you don’t know how to make an accommodations request. Why I Won’t Share Exact Prompts In thinking about it, I decided I couldn’t share exact prompts here as suggestions for you. I can’t share exact prompts here because the responses ChatGPT provides depends on a number of factors including: how often you use it; how often you have asked it to perform tasks similar to what you would be asking it to do when making an accommodations request; and what information you need it to provide. As an example, finding the ADA coordinator for Boston, MA is significantly easier than is finding the ADA coordinator for Leander, TX, as the recording demonstrates. Since I don’t think providing exact prompts will work, I want to strongly encourage you to try using ChatGPT, whether you have the paid or free version) to help you develop an accommodations request under the ADA. If you try using ChatGPT to make an accommodations request or to learn more about the law, please let me know. I would appreciate hearing about your experiences. Important Notes On ChatGPT’s capabilities The paid version can create a sample request in different formats, including Word. The free version cannot provide sample text in different formats, but you can paste its sample text into the app of your choice. The paid version can provide actual names of people holding different positions. The free version does not give specific contact information. The paid version can be customized to learn how you want it to work. The free version cannot be customized. Conclusion I strongly believe AI can do much to help all of us make ADA requests and learn more about our legal rights. If you are interested, I urge you to give ChatGPT a try. You may find that by using it you are more comfortable making ADA requests and you may be more willing to demand your access.