Olmstead v. L.C.

Olmstead v. L.C.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 21, 1999 Decided June 22, 1999
Full case name	Tommy Olmstead, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Human Resources, et al., Petitioners v. L. C., by Jonathan Zimring, guardian ad litem and next friend, et al.
Citations	527 U.S. 581 (more) 119 S. Ct. 2176; 144 L. Ed. 2d 540; 1999 U.S. LEXIS 4368; 67 U.S.L.W. 4567; 9 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 705; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4859; 99 Daily Journal DAR 6263; 1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 3627; 12 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 424
Argument	Oral argument
Holding
Under Title II of the ADA, States are required to place persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than in institutions when the State's treatment professionals have determined that: (1) community placement is appropriate, (2) the transfer from institutional care to a less restrictive setting is not opposed by the affected individual, and (3) the placement can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the State and the needs of others with mental disabilities.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Majority	Ginsburg, joined by O'Connor, Souter, Breyer (in full); Stevens (except part III-B)
Concurrence	Stevens (in part)
Concurrence	Kennedy (in judgment), joined by Breyer (part I)
Dissent	Thomas, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia
Laws applied
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding discrimination against people with intellectual disabilities. The Supreme Court held that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals with intellectual disabilities have the right to live in the community rather than in institutions if, in the words of the opinion of the Court, "the State's treatment professionals have determined that community placement is appropriate, the transfer from institutional care to a less restrictive setting is not opposed by the affected individual, and the placement can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the State and the needs of others with mental disabilities."^[1] The case was brought by the Atlanta Legal Aid Society on behalf of Lois Curtis.