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

  • Fall Submissions Open – Headnotes

    The Minnesota Law Review: Headnotes fall submissions period is open. For more information, please visit our submissions page. Share this: on Twitter on Facebook on Google+

  • Vol. 97 Piece Quoted in Mother Jones Article

    A recent Mother Jones article predicting how the Roberts Court would resolve King v. Burwell draws on How Business Fares in the Supreme Court from Volume 97. You can read the article here. Share this: on Twitter on Facebook on Google+

  • Welcome to De Novo

    For nearly one hundred years, the Minnesota Law Review has been a leader amongst academic legal publications. When Professor Henry J. Fletcher launched the journal in 1917, his goal was simple. It was to “contribute a little something to the systematic growth of the whole law.” Since then, the Law [...]

  • Minnesota Law Review Alum Remembered 45 Years After Death

    Minnesota Law Review alumnus Tom Cranna was honored at the Annual Banquet this Spring, 45 years after his death. Mr. Cranna was remembered for his contributions to the journal, the school, and the positive impact he had on his family and friends. The Devil’s Lake Journal published a memorial which [...]

  • Follow MLR on Twitter!

    The Minnesota Law Review is proud to announce that we are now on Twitter. Follow us @MinnesotaLawRev for information and updates concerning the petition period and deadlines, the opening and closing of article submissions, our 2014 Symposium: Offenders in the Community, and all other news concerning our authors and publications. [...]


cforms contact form by delicious:days