October 2018 - Parks & Recreation - 36

LAW REVIEW

By design, the State qualifying
times established by the IHSA at
the Sectional meet preclude thousands of able-bodied runners from
qualifying for State each year. Approximately 10 percent of all runners on IHSA-member track and
field teams qualify for State.

ADA Accommodation
Requests
A.H. could not possibly attain any
of the qualifying times for State. In
fact, world-record holders in the
T-36 classification would be unable
to achieve any of the qualifying
times. Accordingly, on September
26, 2015, A.H., on an individual basis, submitted the following
three accommodation requests to
the IHSA:
(1) IHSA create separate para-ambulatory time standards
for the Sectional and State meets
in the 100-, 200-, 400-, and
800-meter races; (2) IHSA create
a para-ambulatory division in the
annual 5K Road Race; and, (3)
A.H. be allowed to use a modified
starting block in the 100, 200, and
400 races.

A.H. could not possibly attain any
of the qualifying times for State. In
fact, world-record holders in the T-36
classification would be unable to
achieve any of the qualifying times.
In his first accommodation request, A.H. recommended IHSA
adopt the Louisiana High School
Athletic Association (LHSAA)
qualifying times for para-ambulatory runners. A.H. had recorded
personal best times in the 100, 200,
34

Parks & Recreation

400 and 800 that would qualify
him for State under the LHSAA
qualifying times.

Civil Rights Office Guidance
On October 8, 2015, the executive
director granted A.H.'s third request for a modified starting block,
but he denied the first two requests.
In so doing, the executive director
determined these accommodation
requests were " not reasonable " because A.H. " currently has the same
opportunity to compete in track
and field as his nondisabled peers. "
In reaching this determination,
the executive director relied on
guidance from the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (DOE OCR). The DOE
OCR noted in a letter to school
officials that students with disabilities must be provided access to extracurricular activities, but schools
were under no obligation to create
separate or different activities for
the disabled.
On October 25, 2015, A.H. appealed the executive director's ruling. The IHSA Board held a hearing on December 14, 2015, and
sustained the executive director's
decision to deny the requests. The
board noted that A.H. was already
part of the team, and that being
part of the team was a greater intangible benefit than participating
at State. Moreover, the board emphasized that the IHSA's goal is
to integrate disabled athletes with
able-bodied athletes, rather than
separating them. Finally, the board
concluded that granting A.H.'s request would provide him an unfair
competitive advantage, because he
would have a greater opportunity
to advance to State and earn points
for his team.

| O C T O B E R 2 0 1 8 | W W W. PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N . O R G

ADA Claim
A.H. filed his lawsuit in federal
district court on February 4, 2016,
seeking injunctive relief to compel
the IHSA to adopt the separate
para-ambulatory qualifying times
and divisions at the Sectional and
State track meets, as well as the
Road Race. The complaint alleged
that IHSA's refusal to adopt these
accommodations amounted to impermissible discrimination against
disabled individuals in violation of
the ADA.
After discovery, the district court
granted summary judgment in favor of the IHSA. The district court
found that A.H. could not show
that the alleged discrimination had
occurred on the basis or by reason
of his disability. Even if he had presented such evidence of discrimination based on disability, the district
court found his accommodation
requests were not reasonable, because the requested accommodations would fundamentally alter
the nature of the IHSA's track and
field competitions. A.H. appealed.

Based on Disability
As cited by the federal appeals
court, in pertinent part, the ADA
provides protections against discrimination for disabled individuals in any public entity, as well as in
places of public accommodation:
No disabled individuals shall,
by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be
denied the benefits of the services,
programs, or activities of a public
entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.
No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of
disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, fa-

October 2018 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2018 - Parks & Recreation