Legal funding helps advance protections for the disabled

Traveling on public transportation, writing an email or picking up groceries might seem like easy, mundane tasks. But for the one in five Americans with a disability, they present a serious challenge.

Fortunately, these tasks are easier today than they were a few decades ago, in large part because the legal system has played a critical role in advancing the cause of disabled Americans. Today, the legal system — and legal funding in particular — continues to help level the playing field for disabled Americans across the country.

Consider a construction worker who becomes disabled due to an accident at an unsafe work site. The worker has a credible personal injury claim, but is unable to return to work while the case is pending. The construction company has the means to drag the suit out for years. In the meantime, medical bills and other everyday costs can pile up. That's where legal funding comes in.

Plaintiffs with meritorious cases can apply for legal funding to help pay for everyday costs such as groceries and rent while their case is being considered. This funding can make a significant impact on a person's ability to pursue their case. But plaintiffs will be unable to stay the course in their pursuit of justice if deep-pocketed interests win in their campaign to eliminate legal funding. That is something all of us fighting to ease the burdens of the disabled should worry about.

Legal funding is an important issue for New Yorkers, which is why the state legislature is currently considering a bill sponsored by Assemblymember Erik Dilan, D-Brooklyn, to effectively regulate legal funders. It includes provisions for robust oversight, licensing, and disclosure. An alternative bill circulating in the Senate includes far less regulation and oversight, and would impose gratuitous rate caps on legal funding advances. This is the wrong approach, and would threaten to eliminate access to legal funding for victims who need it. Dilan's bill will strengthen the ability of victims to pursue justice and help level the playing field against powerful defendants.

I know how difficult living with a disability can be — I've lived with one for almost my entire life. When I was a teenager, a car accident left me with epilepsy. I went on to become a congressman and advocate for the rights of all disabled Americans. I was the primary sponsor of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits discrimination based on disability, imposes accessibility requirements in public places, and requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for disabled employees. It is the civil rights legislation for disabled Americans.

Since the ADA was passed, the legal system has played an essential role in establishing protections for the disabled. Barden v. The City of Sacramento, filed in 1999, was the first case to establish that sidewalks had to be ADA accessible. In 2007, Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America v. The University of Michigan challenged the lack of accessibility of seats and restrooms in a major stadium, and set the bar for accessibility of stadiums and public facilities across the country. Just this year, advocates in Judith Smith, et al. v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al. brought Uber to court over wheelchair accessibility.

I applaud those who are using the legal system and legal funding to fight against the odds. It is crucial that this progress continue, and I am confident it will if people can continue to access legal funding. To those who are criticizing victims seeking justice for their case, I simply ask: What if it was you?