Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 620

Should the Process For Filing Lawsuits Under the Americans with Disabilities Act be Reformed?

Argument in favor

This bill would improve the process for filing lawsuits under the ADA by deterring frivolous claims and giving businesses a timeframe in which to fix the alleged infraction.

Kat's Opinion
···
02/15/2018
Only if it's going to benefit the people that are disabled. As far as lawsuits go a lot of them are frivolous. But majority of the people that are disability they just want the problem resolved as quickly as possible. Your life is hard enough they don't need it made any harder. So maybe it should say that the businesses should take care of it within 30 days. Stop making life harder for people with disabilities. Who knows you could be the next person who has to live with the disability.
Like (29)
Follow
Share
Jeff's Opinion
···
02/15/2018
The process needs reform to better protect against frivolous lawsuits by unscrupulous lawyers. These lawsuits are to generate money and fees. Not address access. Rather than proscribe mandatory penalties an arbitration or remedial process would better achieve desired results for the disabled.
Like (8)
Follow
Share
Tooluser1's Opinion
···
02/13/2018
Frivolous lawsuits are the bane of civilized society.
Like (4)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

These reforms would serve as a pretense for businesses to delay or avoid making accommodations for persons with disabilities, undermining the spirit of the ADA.

David's Opinion
···
02/13/2018
As a disabled Gulf War veteran I depend on the laws being enforced so I can continue my life just like everyone else. I volunteered and fought for these rights. I’m already restricted at times to be like everyone else, in my eyes this bill is a burden on those of us who have disabilities. I vote and midterms are right around the corner!
Like (211)
Follow
Share
David's Opinion
···
02/15/2018
This bill would force people to wait potentially months just to gain access to certain businesses and institutions, and the problem it's intended to fix by doing this is extremely small-scale.
Like (50)
Follow
Share
IllWill's Opinion
···
02/13/2018
The bill is clearly designed to benefit people who are violating ADA provisions by dumping a ton of work on the people who are filing the lawsuits. Disabled Americans shouldn’t have to go through an unnecessarily odious process to prove to the courts that their rights are being violated.
Like (26)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house Passed February 15th, 2018
    Roll Call Vote 225 Yea / 192 Nay
      house Committees
      Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
      Committee on the Judiciary
    IntroducedJanuary 24th, 2017

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

Bill Activity

  • action
    Introduced in House
  • referral
    Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  • referral
    Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
  • action
    Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
  • calendar
    Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 15 - 9.
  • action
    Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 115-539.
  • calendar
    Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 403.
  • action
    Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 736 Reported to House. Provides for consideration of H.R. 620 and H.R. 3978 under structured rules and H.R. 3299 under a closed rule. Each bill shall be debatable for one hour. The resolution provides for proceedings during the period of February 16, 2018 through February 23, 2018.
  • action
    Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 736.
  • action
    Provides for consideration of H.R. 620 and H.R. 3978 under structured rules and H.R. 3299 under a closed rule. Each bill shall be debatable for one hour. The resolution provides for proceedings during the period of February 16, 2018 through February 23, 2018.
  • action
    House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 736 and Rule XVIII.
  • action
    The Speaker designated the Honorable Michael K. Simpson to act as Chairman of the Committee.
  • action
    GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 620.
  • action
    Mr. Goodlatte moved that the committee rise.
  • action
    On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 620 as unfinished business.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Denham Part A amendment No. 1.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Langevin Part A amendment No. 2.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Langevin amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Langevin demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Foster Part A amendment No. 3.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Speier Part A amendment No. 4.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Bera Part A amendment No. 5.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 736, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Poe(TX) Part A amendment No. 6.
  • action
    Mr. Poe (TX) moved that the committee rise.
  • action
    On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 620 as unfinished business.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
  • action
    UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question on adoption of an amendment which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
  • action
    The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 620.
  • action
    The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
  • action
    The House adopted the amendments en gross as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
  • vote
    On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 192 (Roll no. 80).
  • action
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    Received in the Senate.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house Passed February 15th, 2018
    Roll Call Vote 225 Yea / 192 Nay
      house Committees
      Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
      Committee on the Judiciary
    IntroducedJanuary 24th, 2017

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    Only if it's going to benefit the people that are disabled. As far as lawsuits go a lot of them are frivolous. But majority of the people that are disability they just want the problem resolved as quickly as possible. Your life is hard enough they don't need it made any harder. So maybe it should say that the businesses should take care of it within 30 days. Stop making life harder for people with disabilities. Who knows you could be the next person who has to live with the disability.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    As a disabled Gulf War veteran I depend on the laws being enforced so I can continue my life just like everyone else. I volunteered and fought for these rights. I’m already restricted at times to be like everyone else, in my eyes this bill is a burden on those of us who have disabilities. I vote and midterms are right around the corner!
    Like (211)
    Follow
    Share
    This puts the burden of enforcing the ADA onto those who need its help. We've had 25 years of education on ADA compliance. Building owners should be familiar with their obligations by now, not need "compliance through education."
    Like (98)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill would force people to wait potentially months just to gain access to certain businesses and institutions, and the problem it's intended to fix by doing this is extremely small-scale.
    Like (50)
    Follow
    Share
    The bill is clearly designed to benefit people who are violating ADA provisions by dumping a ton of work on the people who are filing the lawsuits. Disabled Americans shouldn’t have to go through an unnecessarily odious process to prove to the courts that their rights are being violated.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    Chronic illness and disability are draining and difficult. Barriers in visible to those without disability or empathy are insurmountable to people with disabilities. So now, we want to require the disabled to fight for themselves, just as want our children to fight for themselves against armed gunman? Many profoundly privileged elected representatives refuse to fight for citizens now, being too busy raking in money from corporations, the NRA, and other equally corrupt manipulators. We must take care of each other.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill “would very deliberately undermine the protections afforded under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)” and would “dramatically increase the burden on any person with a disability who seeks to vindicate their rights.”
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    The lives of people with limited mobility are difficult enough without this added burden. And I don’t buy for a minute that it’s about helping small businesses!
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    Terrible bill, making life harder for those who could use just a little help to get by.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Current regulations about suing states and businesses currently already allow years to pass before they are required to make changes. I cannot for the life of me understand why states and businesses would want to eliminate access to the disabled. Tammy Duckworth lost both her legs and the use of one arm while serving in the military while deployed overseas. She is a US Senator. Why would anyone want to deny her access to anything? I think this is one more way to discriminate and for trump admin to make it easier for businesses to do so. They got a big tax break and the very least they can do is eliminate obstacles and impediments that prohibit persons like Tammy Duckworth from fully experiencing the life every non disabled person can experience. I’m sure there is something in that tax plan that allows businesses to write off or reduce capital expenses. This admin should be ashamed that they have now added the disabled to their litany of inconsequential people: nonwhite, women, middle class, the poor, persons needing food stamps and Medicaid, no advanced education, first, second, or third generation immigrant, liberal, activist for citizens’ rights, citizens believing the law should be followed, persons who have neither the means nor desire to buy off politicians, etc. I asked US Rep Bill Johnson to tell Senator Duckworth that he just made her life more limited.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Businesses have had 27 years to remedy any non-ADA issues with their properties. New construction has had to follow ADA guidelines in construction as well. There is no excuse for businesses to not comply and this legislation unnecessarily puts the burden on those with disabilities and takes away their power to force action.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill not only protects business that are not up to standard from consequences, it puts the responsibility of pointing out these issues on the shoulders of those who have a problem with it.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill does nothing for the Disabled community except allow businesses to get away w/ not making things more accessible for them.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This legislation has been around long enough that it should be common knowledge. I continue to see violations which would be easy to address.Why is legislation not being worked on to help these people more which would also provide for more productive employees.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    I hate this administration 🙄
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    The process needs reform to better protect against frivolous lawsuits by unscrupulous lawyers. These lawsuits are to generate money and fees. Not address access. Rather than proscribe mandatory penalties an arbitration or remedial process would better achieve desired results for the disabled.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    And the attack on our nation's most needy members continues while the corporate hand outs rise.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    The entire ADA should be redone - and please look at the ridiculously absent need for any proof for service animals - it’s gotten to be extremely disruptive and truly unbelievable
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is a slap in the face of people with disabilities and a nod to businesses that they can discriminate without fear if repercussions. It will let businesses refuse to provide services such as a sign language interpreter, thus accessibility. It already frequently happens and recourse is tough. Why put the onus on the individual when the law has been effect for 27 years. It is called the Americans with Disabilities Act and is meant to provide equal access. This bill would severely curtail the rights for people with disabilities.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill can delay access to a location/business for weeks, months, years; while able bodied people have immediate access. It infringes on their civil rights and opens the door for other civil rights infringements. What's more, any business wanting assistance in understanding and complying with the ADA can get free technical assistance from several free, regional service centers. This bill takes out the need to control frivolous lawsuits with legitimate victims of discrimination. Indiana already has a good system for doing this and has very few such lawsuits. There are models for this concern that doesn't trample on the rights of people with disabilities.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE