42 U.S.C. § 12133

Enforcement

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

The remedies, procedures, and rights set forth in section 794a of title 29 shall be the remedies, procedures, and rights this subchapter provides to any person alleging discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of section 12132 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 497 cases (151 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Barnes v. Gorman, 536 U.S. 181 (2002).
Barnes v. Gorman, 536 U.S. 181 (2002). · cites it 4× “42 U. S. C. § 12133 . Section 505(a)(2) of the Rehabilitation Act, in turn, declares that the "remedies, procedures, and rights set forth in title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 .”
Joe Houston v. Marod Supermarkets, Inc., 733 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2013). · cites it 4× “at 1287 (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 12133 ) (emphasis in Tandy). The Tenth Circuit stated that “the totality of Title II’s plain language, the plain language of its enforcement provision, and the statutory scheme’s anti-discriminatory purpose lead [that] court to conclude that Congress…”
United States v. Sec'y Florida Agency for Health Care Admin., 938 F.3d 1221 (11th Cir. 2019). · cites it 10× “” 42 U.S.C. § 12133 . Congress directed the Attorney General to “promulgate regulations in an accessible format that implement [Title II].”
April Cadena v. El Paso Cnty., 946 F.3d 717 (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “2002) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 12133 ). “Thus, ‘[j]urisprudence interpreting either section is applicable to both.”
Scot L. Zimmerman v. State of Oregon Dep't of Just., 170 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 1999). · cites it 5× “Plaintiff and amicus rely, first, on 42 U.S.C. § 12133 , which provides: The remedies, procedures, and rights set forth in section 79ia of Title 29 [the Rehabilitation Act] shall be the remedies, procedures, and rights this subehapter provides to any person alleging…”
Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004). · cites it 2× “Title II's enforcement provision incorporates by reference § 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 92 Stat.”
United States v. Georgia, 546 U.S. 151 (2006). · cites it 2× “See 42 U.S.C. § 12133 (incorporating by reference 29 U.”
Loeffler v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp., 582 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 12133 . For the sake of argument, I will assume that § 12133 confers the same associational discrimination rights to non-disabled litigants as § 794a(a)(2).”
Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc., 681 F.3d 312 (6th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 12133 . Just as the provisions of the ADA incorporating the Rehabilitation Act's enforcement provisions do not bring that Act's standard of care into the ADA, neither does the provision of the ADA incorporating Title VII's enforcement provisions.”
In the Interest of Doe, 60 P.3d 285 (Haw. 2002). · cites it 4× “Under analogous circumstances, other courts have refused to graft ADA requirements onto unrelated statutes. This is not to say that the mother is without a remedy if [the state agency] has violated the ADA.”
S. Baxter Jones v. City of Detroit, Mich., 20 F.4th 1117 (6th Cir. 2021). · cites it 3× “42 U.S.C. § 12133 . Section 505 of the Rehabilitation Act, as it happens, is a borrower too.”
Fry v. Napoleon Cmty. Schs., 137 S. Ct. 743 (2017). “§ 794a(a)(2) ; 42 U.S.C. § 12133 . This Court first considered the interaction between such laws and the IDEA in Smith v.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.