Register today and take advantage of our extended special
Buy 5, Get 1 Free group registration offer before it’s too late!
Alliance Alert: The Alliance for Rights and Recovery proudly stands with the more than 100 members of Congress who have called on the U.S. Department of Justice to immediately rescind its dangerous and misguided memorandum undermining the integration mandate established under Olmstead v. L.C. and the Americans with Disabilities Act. We applaud these congressional leaders for using their voices and their oversight authority to demand accountability from the Department of Justice and to reaffirm that not supporting community integration for people with disabilities is discrimination.
The Alliance has long worked to strengthen the rights of people with disabilities and expand the community-based services that make true integration possible. The DOJ’s recent memo represents a dramatic departure from decades of bipartisan civil rights enforcement and threatens one of the most important protections for people with disabilities in our nation’s history. Weakening the integration mandate risks encouraging states to move away from investing in home and community-based services and toward greater reliance on institutional settings. That is a step backwards that we cannot and will not accept.
We remain committed to advancing policies that protect the civil rights of people with disabilities while expanding the housing, peer support, mental health, substance use, employment, and other community-based services that allow people to successfully live, recover, and thrive in the communities of their choice. The promise of Olmstead is not simply about where services are delivered, it is about ensuring that every person has the opportunity to participate fully in community life with dignity, independence, and self-determination. We will continue working alongside disability rights advocates, people with lived experience, policymakers, and providers to ensure that 糖心动漫vlog and our nation move forward, not backward, in protecting these fundamental rights.
As these federal policy debates continue, there has never been a more important time for advocates to come together. The Alliance Annual Conference will feature a dedicated panel on Olmstead, the integration mandate, and the growing threats to community integration, bringing together nationally recognized disability rights leaders to discuss the future of these critical protections. The conference will also include workshops examining recent federal policy changes affecting mental health, substance use, and disability services, along with advocacy strategies that participants can use to protect rights, strengthen community-based supports, and ensure that people with disabilities continue to have the opportunity to live where they choose with the services they need.
Register for Conference聽
Get Hotel Rooms聽
Full Conference Program
Democrats Probe DOJ Finding that Eases Way for States to Institutionalize Mentally Ill
By聽Sarah N. Lynch | CBS News | July 22, 2026
Senate and House Democrats launched a congressional inquiry on Wednesday into a new controversial Justice Department legal opinion that would make it easier for states to keep people with mental illness institutionalized, rather than paying for them to receive community-based care.
In a letter to Acting Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the lawmakers asked the Justice Department to rescind the June by the Office of Legal Counsel, and asked who was involved in drafting it, in addition to its author, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora Pettit.
“For more than 50 years, federal civil rights laws have recognized that unnecessary segregation and institutionalization constitute discrimination,” they wrote to Blanche.
“The consequences of weakening the integration mandate would be profound,” they continued. “Millions of Americans with disabilities rely on home and community-based services supporting them to be among their families, maintain employment, pursue education, and participate in civic life.”
The letter was signed by 100 Democratic members of the Senate and House, among them, Sens. Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth, Bernie Sanders, Ron Wyden, Chuck Schumer, Sheldon Whitehouse, Elizabeth Warren and Chris Van Hollen. Democratic Reps. Mary Gay Scanlon, Debbie Dingell and Lateefah Simon also signed the letter.
The Office of Legal Counsel in June released a highly controversial legal opinion that runs counter to longstanding legal precedent and would lead to greater rates of .
The OLC found that states are not actually required by law to integrate mentally disabled patients with their peers by providing community or home-based care.
The opinion effectively reinterprets a long-standing Supreme Court case that has served as a cornerstone of America’s disability rights law. That 1999 case, Olmstead v. L.C., held that people with disabilities are entitled to receive services in their communities, rather than in an institution.
The Olmstead case was brought by two women with mental and intellectual disabilities who were each repeatedly placed in institutions in Georgia because they could not obtain coverage for the support they needed to live independently at home.
Although the OLC opinion is not legally binding and does not create precedent, it could still be used by federal agencies such as the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services to guide how they enforce allegations of discrimination by patients who received state-funded care.
Bloomberg Law that the OLC’s legal opinion was largely driven by White House adviser Stephen Miller, who had expressed frustration over the settlements the Civil Rights Division had reached which compelled states to release people with mental illnesses from institutions. According to the report, Miller felt that these settlements would increase homelessness.
The White House and Justice Department, however, each denied to Bloomberg that Miller had played any role in the memo.
As recently as December, the Justice Department was addressing state violations of the Olmstead ruling.
“The Department and South Carolina are working together to ensure that people with serious mental illnesses can be served in the community when they want to be,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a announcing a settlement with South Carolina late last year.
In their letter, the Democratic lawmakers asked the Justice Department to “[i]dentify all department officials, political appointees, and outside individuals, including from the White House, who participated in initiating, drafting, reviewing, approving, or advising on the opinion.”
They also asked whether outside companies or groups, including some who advocate for criminalizing homeless people, provided any legal analysis or briefing materials that were reviewed by OLC in connection with the memo.
The Justice Department confirmed it received the letter and said it is “ensuring the appropriate personnel within the Department are reviewing it carefully.”
Because Democrats do not control the Senate or the House, they may only request the information 鈥 they cannot require a response under congressional subpoena from the Justice Department.
More from CBS News
July 22, 2026
The Honorable Todd Blanche Acting Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530
Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche:
We write to express our outrage concerning the U.S. Department of Justice鈥檚 June 18 opinion, titled 鈥淎pplication of the Rehabilitation Act and Americans with Disabilities Act to State Institutionalization of Patients with Severe Mental Illness or Disabilities,鈥 which would undermine both the scope and enforcement of the integration mandate under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The opinion represents a dramatic departure from decades of federal law, regulations, and judicial precedent protecting the civil rights of people with all types of disabilities and must be withdrawn.
For more than 50 years, federal civil rights laws have recognized that unnecessary segregation and institutionalization constitute discrimination. In 1977 and 1978, the then-Department of Health, Education, and Welfare promulgated regulations requiring recipients of federal financial assistance to provide services to individuals with disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. Congress subsequently ratified and strengthened these requirements when it amended Section 504, and later purposefully included the principles in the ADA in 1990.
In enacting the ADA, Congress explicitly found that 鈥渉istorically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities鈥 and determined that such segregation constitutes a serious and pervasive form of discrimination. The ADA was designed not merely to prohibit intentional exclusion, but to ensure that people with disabilities have meaningful opportunities to live, work, learn, and participate fully in community life as full members of their communities.
In 1999, the Supreme Court affirmed these principles in Olmstead v. L.C., holding that unjustified institutional isolation of individuals with disabilities is discrimination under the ADA. The Court recognized that institutionalization perpetuates harmful stereotypes about the capabilities of people with disabilities and severely diminishes opportunities for family relationships, employment, economic independence, educational advancement, and participation in community life.
For more than 25 years, federal courts across the country, Republican and Democratic administrations alike, the Department of Justice, and Congress have interpreted and implemented the Olmstead decision to require states and public entities to provide services in integrated settings when appropriate. This long-accepted interpretation has enabled hundreds of thousands of Americans with disabilities to avoid harmful and unnecessary institutionalization and remain connected to their families, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, and chosen communities.
The Department鈥檚 recent opinion rejects this settled understanding and threatens to undermine one of the most important civil rights protections for people with disabilities. Notably, the opinion itself acknowledges that its interpretation is 鈥渙ut of step with common understanding of that decision within Federal courts.鈥 Such an admission should give serious pause before the Department reverses decades of enforcement efforts or undertakes further regulatory actions. In order to protect the civil rights of disabled people, DOJ must meaningfully enforce the integration mandate. Instead, on July 20, DOJ issued a notice stating that guidance on enforcing Olmstead and the integration mandate, which DOJ relied upon for the past 15 years, was not enforceable, and DOJ would no longer rely upon it in its enforcement of Title II of the ADA; the notice also stated that DOJ plans to revisit the guidance.
The consequences of weakening the integration mandate would be profound. Millions of Americans with disabilities rely on home and community-based services supporting them to be among their families, maintain employment, pursue education, and participate in civic life. The Department鈥檚 new interpretation risks creating, supporting, and encouraging policies that steer individuals into segregated settings such as nursing homes, psychiatric facilities, and segregated classrooms. Such a result would be inconsistent with federal law, contrary to congressional intent, and harmful to people with disabilities and their families. We cannot return to a time when people with disabilities were denied basic civil rights, ripped away from their families, and institutionalized against their will.
The disability community has spent decades advancing the promise that disability should never be grounds for exclusion from community life. The integration mandate is a cornerstone of that promise, and weakening it would reverse decades of bipartisan progress. People with disabilities belong in their communities, with the services and support they need. They deserve clear assurance that the federal government will continue to defend their right to live, receive services, and participate fully in society.
Therefore, we urge the Department of Justice to:
1.聽聽聽聽聽 Immediately rescind its June 18, 2026 opinion concerning the integration mandate under Title II of the ADA and Section 504;
2.聽聽聽聽聽 Reaffirm the Department鈥檚 longstanding commitment to enforcing Olmstead v. L.C. and the integration mandate;
3.聽聽聽聽聽 Continue vigorous enforcement efforts to prevent unnecessary institutionalization and segregation of people with disabilities; and
4.聽聽聽聽聽 Engage with people with disabilities, family members, advocates, providers, and state and local governments to strengthen community-based supports and services.
To better understand the basis for the Department鈥檚 actions and the implications of this opinion, please provide responses to the following questions and requests no later than August 5, 2026:
1.聽聽聽聽聽 Provide all memoranda, legal analyses, briefing materials, draft opinions, and other documents from within the Department or received by the Department related to or relied upon in the development and drafting of the June 18, 2026 opinion, including any internal or external instructions, responses, and feedback related to the final opinion and any draft iterations.
2.聽聽聽聽聽 Identify companies and organizations that provided legal analyses, briefing materials, or other communication related to the development of the OLC opinion, such as the Cicero Institute, an organization founded by Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir, that advocates for criminalizing homelessness; Social Purpose Corrections, an organization headed by a former CoreCivic warden; or any other entity that owns, operates, or plans to expand segregated settings for individuals with disabilities.
3.聽聽聽聽聽 Identify all Department officials, political appointees, and outside individuals, including from the White House, who participated in initiating, drafting, reviewing, approving, or advising on the opinion.
4.聽聽聽聽聽 Identify every pending or completed Department investigation, settlement agreement, consent decree, statement of interest, technical assistance document, or enforcement action that may be affected by the opinion.
5.聽聽聽聽聽 Explain whether the Department intends to modify, withdraw, or cease enforcement of any existing Olmstead-related settlements, consent decrees, or agreements as a result of the opinion.
6.聽聽聽聽聽 Describe any consultations conducted with disability rights organizations, individuals with disabilities, state and local governments, providers, researchers, or other stakeholders prior to issuance of the opinion.
7.聽聽聽聽聽 Provide all communications between the Department and the White House, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Department of Health and Human Services related to the opinion.
8.聽聽聽聽聽 Explain whether the Department conducted any analysis of the opinion鈥檚 impact on:
1.聽聽聽聽聽 Individuals receiving home and community-based services;
2.聽聽聽聽聽 Individuals at risk of institutionalization;
3.聽聽聽聽聽 Individuals involved in psychiatric institutions, nursing facilities, segregated day programs, correctional settings, and segregated educational placements;
4.聽聽聽聽聽 State Medicaid programs; and
5.聽聽聽聽聽 Existing federal disability rights enforcement efforts.
9. Provide any estimate prepared by the Department regarding the number of individuals with disabilities who may be affected by changes in federal enforcement resulting from the opinion.
The integration mandate has transformed the lives of countless Americans with disabilities by expanding access to community living, employment, education, and self-determination. We urge the Department to honor both the letter and spirit of the ADA by rescinding this opinion and reaffirming its commitment to the civil rights of people with disabilities.
Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary