Read on Twitter
There is apparently a card circulating for people who do not want to wear facemasks. The card states they have a medical condition that prevents them from wearing a facemask, they do not need to disclose it, and that not allowing them to shop is discrimination under the ADA.
/1
/1
It obliquely threatens fines and reporting for not allowing the non-masked to shop in the store.
Please allow me to explain the misconceptions behind this card.
/2
Please allow me to explain the misconceptions behind this card.
/2
The card assumes that a disability is a free pass. This is not accurate. The ADA requires non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation UNLESS doing so would endanger the health, welfare, or safety of employees or other shoppers.
/3
/3
This is covered under Title III of the ADA governing retail establishments, where it states:
/4
/4
"Direct Threat" is defined by Title III as follows:
/5
/5
Continuing on this, the ADA even includes guidance on how to determine if the accommodation creates a "direct threat":
/6
/6
This all adds up to "We do not have to grant you the accommodation you request if doing so would make is unsafe for others in a manner that poses a real threat" which, considering guidance from the CDC and orders stating masks are required, tends to support "No mask, no shop."
/7
/7
"But Boozy, what about people who real do have respiratory conditions that make them unable to wear a mask? Why can't they shop?"
But they can. The ADA requires you to make a "reasonable accommodation" for the disability, not necessarily the REQUESTED accommodation.
/8
But they can. The ADA requires you to make a "reasonable accommodation" for the disability, not necessarily the REQUESTED accommodation.
/8
So where a person says "I cannot wear a mask due to my disability," the accommodation does NOT have to be "Fine, no mask needed for you then."
It can be "Okay. Well, we offer curbside pickup if you shop online, and we can have an employee actually pick out things for you."
/9
It can be "Okay. Well, we offer curbside pickup if you shop online, and we can have an employee actually pick out things for you."
/9
Notably, where someone says "I will sue you for violating the ADA" we need to be certain of another thing:
That they have standing to do so. /10
That they have standing to do so. /10
While anyone can threaten to bring ADA action, the truth of the matter is the right to a private action rests only in a person with a disability.
So if Karen Covid is saying "IF YOU DENY ME ENTRY I WILL SUE YOU BECAUSE ADA" simply to be a dick, that isn't really a threat. /11
So if Karen Covid is saying "IF YOU DENY ME ENTRY I WILL SUE YOU BECAUSE ADA" simply to be a dick, that isn't really a threat. /11
But, and let me be crystal clear, the real problem here is PEOPLE ARE ABUSING THE ADA FOR THEIR SHIT REASONS. A law that exists to make certain those who are differently-abled are allowed to live regular lives and businesses allow them to do so within reasonable expectations./12
Those people who are saying "I won't wear a mask and you can't make me because I HAVE A LAMINATED CARD I BOUGHT OFFLINE" are abusing a system to score a political point in their own mind, and hurting others in doing so.
/13
/13
And, in the long run, because the ADA (appropriately) says a person who falls under its purview is not required to disclose their medical history to Bob, the manager at Walmart, to be entitled to modifications, these assholes are playing "Neener Neener, you can't touch me." /14
Which, you know, we saw how well that worked out when people started using it as an excuse to bring their untrained chihuahua into a restaurant by buying a small "service dog" vest online:
It hurts those who actually need the protection of the ADA by making people question. /15
It hurts those who actually need the protection of the ADA by making people question. /15
Long story short -
If you need more proof these anti-maskers are the biggest entitled assholes on the face of the planet, appreciate the fact they're actively attempting to exploit protections in place for a number of Americans, simply to justify throwing a tantrum at Krogers.
If you need more proof these anti-maskers are the biggest entitled assholes on the face of the planet, appreciate the fact they're actively attempting to exploit protections in place for a number of Americans, simply to justify throwing a tantrum at Krogers.
As always: I’m a lawyer. I’m not your lawyer. I am not your company’s lawyer. A guy with a cartoon badger icon on Twitter is in no way a substitute for talking to your lawyer/legal department. Seriously, use your brain here.
Great, this escaped furry Twitter.
I have shit to promote, but the hell with that. Go give some money to an organization supplying medical providers with PPE, helping low income families and individuals, or protecting folks who need the ADA during this trying time.
I have shit to promote, but the hell with that. Go give some money to an organization supplying medical providers with PPE, helping low income families and individuals, or protecting folks who need the ADA during this trying time.
P.S. I have been advised public school lied to me and “differently abled” is not the appropriate terminology. “Disabled” is, as I have been advised, perfectly fine and should be utilized.
