Minnesota Law Review

Note, Establishing a Substantial Limitation in Interacting with Others: A Call for Clearer Guidance from the EEOC

Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with the goal of providing clear and consistent standards for eliminating discrimination against persons with disabilities. To be disabled within the meaning of the ADA, a person must have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity. This definition seems simple on its face; however, it has resulted in much confusion for both courts and litigants. Persons with mental impairments seeking to establish a disability based on a substantial limitation in interacting with others face a particularly difficult battle. Currently, the circuits disagree on two fundamental issues: first, whether interacting with others constitutes a major life activity under the ADA; and second, if so, what constitutes a substantial limitation in this activity.

The unpredictability surrounding this issue disadvantages employers and employees alike, and it underscores the need for more concrete guidance regarding what constitutes a disability under the ADA. This Note calls for Congress to authorize the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to promulgate regulations defining when a mental impairment results in a substantial limitation in interacting with others. The regulations should create a presumptive disability scheme based on established diagnostic criteria for psychiatric disorders. Specifically, a substantial limitation in interacting with others, and hence disability, would be presumed for psychiatric diagnoses in which significant impairment in interpersonal functioning is a required characteristic of the disorder. For other psychiatric diagnoses, plaintiffs would be required to present documented medical evidence regarding the impact of their disorder on their ability to interact with others. Such concrete guidance from the EEOC would provide needed clarity to this contentious and confusing area of the law.

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Volume 97 Lead Piece Profiled in New York Times

    The Volume 97 Lead Piece, a study of how the Supreme Court treats business interests by distinguished legal scholars Lee Epstein, William M. Landes, and Richard A. Posner, was profiled in the May 5, 2013 edition of the New York Times. The story, titled Corporations Find a Friend in the Supreme Court, [...]

  • Volume 98 Spring Submissions Closed

    The Minnesota Law Review has closed the spring submissions period for Volume 98. Submissions for Volume 98 will reopen on Thursday, August 1. Please see the submissions page for more details.

  • Volume 98 Submissions Will Open Feb. 15

    The Minnesota Law Review will begin accepting submissions for Volume 98 on Friday, February 15, 2013. Please see this page for more details.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces Volume 98 Editorial Board

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce its Volume 98 editorial board, headed by Editor in Chief Jake Vandelist.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces 2013 Symposium Topic

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce that its 2013 symposium will address the legal and political issues facing organized labor in the United States. The symposium will be held at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 25, 2013.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days