Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Rehabilitation Act Discrimination Action
In Solomon v. Vilsack, No. 09-5319, an action alleging that the Secretary of Agriculture violated plaintiff's rights under the Rehabilitation Act by refusing to provide reasonable accommodations for her disability, the court vacated summary judgment for defendants where 1) claims for federal disability retirement benefits and disability-discrimination claims under the Rehabilitation Act did not so inherently conflict as to justify presumptively barring recipients of such benefits from asserting Rehabilitation Act claims, and 2) a reasonable jury could find that the statements plaintiff and her doctor made in support of her application for disability benefits were consistent with her current claim that she could have performed the essential functions of her position with reasonable accommodation.
As the court wrote: "This case involves the interaction of two statutory regimes designed to benefit and protect federal employees with disabilities: the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the disability retirement provisions of the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986."