Reasonable Accommodation

In case you haven't heard, some of the culture warriors who oppose wearing a mask when they go out in public are pretending to have a disability that prevents them from wearing a mask. They've created a sign for their fellow mask-resisters to bring with them to businesses, claiming ADA protection of their right to enter the store and citing HIPAA privacy rules.

Here's one of the signs:


This Twitter thread by an attorney had an interesting take on that.

First, HIPAA does not apply. Period. HIPAA applies to medical facilities and users of medical info (your insurance company). Done. The ADA claim is more insidious, and needs some explication.

The ADA does indeed apply to stores, restaurants, hotels, and just about anyplace else that falls under the very broad definition of public accommodation.

And yes, people do fake it sometimes (especially wypipo claiming their animal is an a emotional support megalodon).

So let's say that someone shows up at the grocery store without a mask and demands that they get to shop without it.

The store may still refuse.

The ADA requires that public accommodations make "reasonable accommodations" to the request... A reasonable accommodation is one that allows the disabled person to avail themselves of the full use of the public setting reasonably. Not necessarily the way disabled person wants to, but reasonably.

Sometimes the reasonable accommodation is frankly suboptimal. Contemporary architects are HORRIBLE at disability accommodation...

Were I general counsel for a major grocery chain — and judging by my bank account I am surely not — I would advise store staff not to permit unmasked people to shop in the store, but to have store staff do the shopping for them, waiving any such fees that might ordinarily entail...

Accommodation must be *reasonable.* Reasonable is a sliding scale based on the circumstances, and is not necessary that the accommodation be exactly how the customer demands it.

The beauty part is that this isn't even malicious compliance. It's a legit solution. Is it ideal? Probably not, but is it suitable for people claiming disability? Under the circumstances, yes.

Retailers have a responsibility to protect all their customers from infection...

Will this solution piss off the right wingers cynically twisting disability accommodation for their own purposes? Absolutely, but these are the people who think ADA compliance is a shitstorm game for plaintiff's lawyers.