The Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a case that could have far-reaching implications for millions of Americans who retire due to disabilities. At issue is whether federal employment protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) apply to former employees, a question that has divided lower courts.
While the justices wrestled with the broader implications, attorneys for both the plaintiff and the federal government suggested a narrower ruling, focusing on the specific circumstances of the case involving Karyn Stanley, a retired firefighter from Sanford, Florida.
The Case of Karyn Stanley
Karyn Stanley worked for nearly two decades as a firefighter before retiring in 2018 due to Parkinson’s disease. When she was hired in 1999, her benefits included continued health insurance coverage until age 65 if she retired after 25 years of service or became disabled. However, Stanley discovered that in 2003, the city had reduced benefits for disabled retirees, leaving her to pay the bulk of her insurance premiums after an initial two-year subsidy.
Stanley filed suit under the ADA, arguing that the city discriminated against her because of her disability. She seeks a restoration of the $1,000 monthly premium subsidy until she turns 65.
ADA Protections: Current Limits and Questions of Coverage
The ADA prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities but specifies that protections apply to those who “can perform the essential functions” of their employment. A federal appeals court ruled against Stanley, stating that because she is no longer able to work as a firefighter, she is not covered by the ADA.
Stanley’s attorneys counter that the law should apply because her benefits were reduced while she was still employed, even though the effects were felt after her retirement. They argue that a narrower interpretation would allow employers to retroactively strip benefits for disabled workers without recourse.
Broader Implications for Retirees with Disabilities
A broad ruling in Stanley’s favor could extend anti-discrimination protections under the ADA to cover retirees, potentially affecting millions of Americans who leave the workforce due to disabilities. However, the Department of Justice (DOJ) urged the court to rule narrowly, emphasizing that Stanley’s case can be resolved without deciding whether the ADA applies universally to retirees.
Frederick Liu, representing the DOJ, argued that the justices should avoid sweeping conclusions, stating, “This court’s usual practice is not to decide issues more broadly than it needs to.”
The Justices’ Concerns
The justices expressed mixed views during oral arguments. Justice Elena Kagan noted the case could be decided on its unique facts, avoiding broader questions about the scope of the ADA. “It seems a little bit odd to decide this bigger, broader question… when as to this particular person, it’s academic,” she remarked.
Justice Samuel Alito, however, pushed for clarity on whether Stanley’s claims constitute actual discrimination, questioning whether the city’s actions specifically targeted disabled retirees.
The City’s Defense
The City of Sanford maintains that its actions did not constitute discrimination under the ADA. The city’s attorneys argue that Stanley received more favorable treatment than nondisabled retirees with fewer than 25 years of service, who were ineligible for any subsidy.
Deepak Gupta, Stanley’s attorney, countered that the city’s decision to reduce benefits for disabled retirees was inherently discriminatory, as it singled out individuals “solely because of their disabilities.”
Awaiting a Decision
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Stanley v. City of Sanford, expected by summer, could clarify whether the ADA’s anti-discrimination protections extend to retirees. While the court may limit its decision to Stanley’s case, a broader ruling could reshape how employers manage benefits for disabled retirees, with significant implications for disability rights nationwide.
Got a reaction? Share your thoughts in the comments
Enjoyed this article? Subscribe to our free Newsletter for captivating articles, exclusive content, and the latest news.
