An Unfinished Journey:

Community Integration: Olmstead v. L.C., ex rel. Zimring

The U.S. Supreme court gets serious

In 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "unjustified isolation of individuals with disabilities" through "undue institutionalization" was discrimination based on disability in violation of the ADA. The landmark decision, known as Olmstead, became the disability rights movement's Brown v. Board of Education.

The story of this case began with Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson.

Ms. Curtis and Ms. Wilson were women with developmental disabilities who were admitted to the state-run Georgia Regional Hospital and then confined to a psychiatric unit. After treatment, their medical providers said they were ready to move to a community-based program. But they remained confined for years. A lawsuit was filed in 1995 in the federal district court in Georgia against Tommy Olmstead, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Human Resources. Ms. Curtis and Ms. Wilson argued that their unnecessary confinement violated their rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg announced the decision, which held that the ADA requires a state to offer its services and programs in the "most integrated setting appropriate"—a setting that "enables individuals with disabilities to interact with non-disabled persons to the fullest extent possible."  

The Olmstead decision opened the door for people with disabilities and their families to demand a full range of community services as alternatives to services provided in institutional settings.

Photo: The two women are standing outside the US Supreme Court building. Lois Curtis, A black woman with short black hair is wearing a black dress and coat. Next to her is Elaine Wilson, a white woman with brown hair wearing a pink dress and coat. Photo courtesy of Tom Olin.
Stock photo of the exterior of the U.S. Supreme Court building with white columns.

Link to Minnesota's Olmstead Plan: https://mn.gov/olmstead/mn-olmstead-plan/about-mn-olmstead-plan/