Supreme Court Declines to Rule on Case Involving Self-Appointed ADA Compliance Tester
The Supreme Court will not rule on a case involving a self-appointed tester of the Americans with Disabilities Act suing hotels for alleged violations if she does not plan to stay at them
The Supreme Court announced on Tuesday that it will not be resolving a case heard earlier in the term regarding whether a self-appointed "tester" of the Americans with Disabilities Act can sue hotels over alleged violations of the civil rights law if she has no intention of staying at them.
The court ruled that the case was moot after the plaintiff at the center of the dispute, Deborah Laufer, dropped her lawsuit. She had sued the hotel for non-compliance with ADA rules which require hotels to include information on their websites about their accessibility. The Maine hotel, operated by Acheson Hotels, posted the required information while the lawsuit made its way through lower courts, and the company later sold the hotel.
Legal experts and advocates for disability rights had suggested that if the justices addressed the core legal issues in the case, their ruling could have a substantial impact on the actual implementation of the important statute, which is designed to protect people with disabilities from discrimination in public facilities and various other contexts.
The US Supreme Court is seen in Washington, DC on November 13, 2023.
MandelNgan/AFP/Getty Images
The Supreme Court will review a case that may create obstacles for Congress in taxing the wealthy. According to Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the case is now irrelevant under these circumstances, and she has nullified the appeals court ruling that had permitted the lawsuit to proceed.
"We understand Acheson's concern about litigants trying to manipulate this Court's jurisdiction. However, we do not believe that Laufer abandoned her case in order to avoid our review," Barrett stated. "She chose to dismiss her ongoing ADA cases after her lawyer was sanctioned by a lower court. She assured this Court that she will not file any new cases. Laufer's case against Acheson is now irrelevant, and we are dismissing it for this reason."
"Nevertheless, it is important to note that our approach might be different in future cases," Barrett added.
No dissents were recorded. Both Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson agreed with the decision, with Thomas asserting that the plaintiff should not have been able to bring the suit in the first place. Jackson reiterated her concerns about when the court should vacate lower-court rulings in the event of a moot appeal.
During oral arguments, Acheson's attorneys contended that Laufer lacked the legal standing to bring her ADA suit against Coast Village Inn and Cottages since she did not intend to stay at the hotel. The justices deliberated on this matter, ultimately spending a significant amount of time debating whether they should even address the issue.
Liberal Justice Elena Kagan made pointed remarks during oral arguments, noting that the plaintiff had dismissed the case and that the defendant’s website was now ADA-compliant. "So this is, like, dead, dead, dead in all the ways that something can be dead," she stated.
During the arguments, Justice Samuel Alito declared that the case at hand was essentially over and would not reappear between the involved parties. Laufer chose to dismiss all her ongoing lawsuits against hotels after one of her attorneys involved in some of the cases faced professional discipline, expressing concerns that it could detract from her advocacy work. Acheson argued separately that the case had become irrelevant after the hotel updated its website to clarify that it does not offer ADA-compliant accommodations.
Still, the attorney for the company, Adam Unikowsky, pressed the justices in oral arguments to issue a decision on the matter. This would provide much-needed clarity for lower courts, which have been divided on the issue of legal standing for "testers," and help guide future cases.
In this Jun 15, 1982 photo, Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor shakes hands at the graduation ceremonies at Stanford University.
Roger Ressmeyer/Corbis Historical/Getty Images
Sandra Day O'Connor's political acumen and trailblazing approach greatly impacted the Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts also voiced concerns about litigants manipulating the court's jurisdiction by attempting to render a case moot after it has been added to the docket.
"He expressed frustration with continually taking on cases only to have them unresolved due to lack of determination on standing," he said at one point.
Laufers attorney tried to alleviate those concerns, stating during oral arguments that her client has not pursued suits similar to the one against Acheson in years and has no intention to continue such advocacy work.
"We acknowledged in our suggestion of mootness that we were not attempting to manipulate the court's jurisdiction. It is free to address the standing question if it deems this case to still be a suitable vehicle for doing so," attorney Kelsi Corkran informed the justices.
"This is a highly unusual case in which not only does Ms. Laufer no longer have an interest in it, but neither does Acheson since it does not own the hotel," Corkran added.
This story has been updated with additional details.
