In its 1996 opinion Bryant v. Madigan, the Seventh Circuit held that incarcerated plaintiffs could not challenge the prison’s failure to provide medical care under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court grounded the rule not in the text of the ADA, which contradicts it, but instead in the policy goals of the panel. Despite the opinion’s methodological flaws, nearly every circuit has adopted its rule, often with little or no analysis, and district courts often expand their holdings to abrogate the ADA entirely as to incarcerated plaintiffs. In Part I, this Article explains Bryant, its flaws, and its consequences. In Part II, this Article attempts an explanation at Bryant’s influence, specifically how its invented rule allows courts to square prison ADA claims—which are difficult to resolve before trial—with their reflexive impulse to resolve prison claims at early stages carried over from constitutional claims. Finally, in Part III, this Article attempts to provide some guidelines that courts should use to faithfully apply the rule from Bryant for as long as courts are stuck with it rather than expanding it to abrogate disability law for people most reliant on it.

Continue reading Prison Medical Care and Disability Accommodation