The Trump administration withdrew 11 pieces of ADA guidance. How will it affect compliance?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

ATLANTA (AP) — President Donald Trump’s administration withdrew 11 pieces of guidance last month related to the Americans with Disabilities Act that helped stores, hotels and other businesses understand their obligation to the law.

-snip-

The Department of Justice said removing the guidance was done as part of a broader effort to reduce regulatory burdens on businesses.

“Putting money back into the pockets of business owners helps everyone by allowing those businesses to pass on cost savings to consumers and bolster the economy,” said U.S. deputy assistant attorney general Mac Warner in a statement.

Disability rights advocates criticized the move, saying it may signal that the federal government is less likely to enforce the ADA and will leave it up to businesses on how to comply.

https://apnews.com/article/ada-guidance-disabilities-trump-ed2214921ac719b72b81d76c03e330c4

[Ms. Toad]

1. Legally, it makes it more costly.

Compliance with the ADA is, legally, a case by case decision. As a practical matter, once they introduced guidelines (e.g. how quickly a manual door can close and still be considered accessible) businesses have relied on the guidelines, rather than making the individual accommodations the law actually requires - and compliance with the guidelines is treated as presumptive compliance with the law.

With those gone, it's back to a case by case basis. Could cost businesses money.

For example - as to the doors - the rate and angle of closure doesn't allow a relatively able-bodied person to get through the door without assistance, as I discovered when I broke my leg a few years ago. I was surprised because the building had just been renovated (significantly enough that it had to modify everything to ADA standards. So I looked them up, timed the door closure, and the angle at which the rapid close stopped. It was in compliance with the regs - but it was not accessible to people in walkers. Because of the regs, I wouldn't have been successful - they met the presumptive access standards. In the absence of the regs, I might be because I could prove, on a case by case basis, many of the rooms (including the bathroom) were not actually accessible .