The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1 - 147

The Evolution of Disability Law

secondary to higher education. But this ability
to advocate for oneself is crucial, as it often indicates whether or not a higher education institution is even aware of a student’s disability
but also, and of equal importance, whether or
not a particular accommodation can be made.

“. . . ‘meaningful access’ requires

When a student provides appropriate
documentation of a disability, a request for
reasonable accommodation can be made. As
Simon (2000) asserts, “The law imposes not
only a prohibition against discrimination but
also, in appropriate circumstances, a positive obligation to make ‘reasonable accommodation’” (p. 70). As with many features of
these laws, there are intersecting points. For
example, Section 504 provides that “recipients . . . shall make such modifications to its
academic requirements as are necessary to
ensure that such requirements do not discriminate or have the effect of discriminating,
on the basis of handicap” (U.S. Department of
Education, n.d., para. 1). The Supreme Court
in Alexander v. Choate elaborated:

disabilities.”

The benefit itself, of course, cannot be defined
in a way that effectively denies otherwise
qualified handicapped individuals the
meaningful access to which they are entitled;
to assure meaningful access, reasonable
accommodations in the grantee’s program or
benefit may have to be made. (1985, p. 301)
As Simon (2000) concludes, “‘meaningful
access’ requires institutions to modify their
programs and services to provide accommodations to students with disabilities” (p. 70).

FAIR HOUSING ACT
Originally codified in 1968, Title VIII of the
Civil Rights Act—commonly known as the Fair
Housing Act—was designed to remove segre-

institutions to modify their
programs and services to provide
accommodations to students with

gated housing and create more integrated living
patterns (Schill & Friedman, 1999). Though
laws (e.g., Civil Rights Act of 1964) and case
decisions (e.g., Gautreaux v. Chicago Housing
Authority, 1967) existed affirming the illegality
of segregated housing prior to 1968, the functional impact was negligible. Even with the Fair
Housing Act of 1968, “housing discrimination
remained endemic in the United States [and]
the Federal Government was either powerless
or unwilling to take major steps to enforce
the Act” (Schill & Friedman, 1999, p. 58). In
response, Congress passed the Fair Housing
Amendments Act (1988), which was designed
to broaden language related to discrimination and to strengthen enforcement avenues
available to the Office of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) (Godschalk, 2012). The
1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act asserted
that “making housing unavailable to persons
because of race or color, religion, sex, national
origin, familial status, or disability” is prohibited (United States Department of Justice, n.d.,
para. 1). The Fair Housing Amendments Act
included the now less preferred term “handicap” as a protected class, substantially expanding rights for people with disabilities with
regard to housing (Rothstein, 2010).
The question applicable to colleges and
V o l u m e 4 0 , No. 1 • 2 0 1 3

147

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1