Victory for Poor, Disabled New Yorkers
A Federal Court Ruled That Poor Disabled New Yorkers Have a Right to the Same Access to Subsistence-Level Benefits As Their Non-Disabled Neighbors
NEW YORK, April 26, 2006 - In a groundbreaking decision barring segregation of disabled persons, a federal court ruled on Wednesday that poor disabled New Yorkers have a right to the same access to subsistence-level benefits of food stamps, public assistance and Medicaid as their non-disabled neighbors. The decision resulted from a challenge by The Legal Aid Society and Milbank Tweed to an aspect of WeCARE, a City program targeting disabled individuals who receive public assistance. The City required the individuals to transfer their cases from one of dozens of offices near their homes to one of just three disabled-only welfare centers (“hubs”) in order to continue to receive food stamps, Medicaid and public assistance. These segregated, disabled-only hubs are located in Manhattan, the Bronx and Brooklyn. There is no hub in Queens or Staten Island, so disabled individuals in those boroughs must endure the expense and pain of lengthy travel to receive help.
In her decision, Southern District of New York Judge Laura Taylor Swain said that: “To permit the continued expansion of the [WeCARE] program . . . would be to turn back the clock not only for the disabled individual who is denied access to the neighborhood center that welcomes her able-bodied neighbors, but also for a society that has made tremendous efforts and strides to improve, rather than constrict, accessibility for and integration of the disabled into all aspects of mainstream life.” The Court described in detail the irreparable harm suffered by those individuals because of their “physical and mental barriers to mobility,” concluding that “[t]he physical and mental trauma suffered by such Plaintiffs cannot be adequately compensated in money damages, particularly where the day-to-day mobility challenges they face are exacerbated by anxiety as to whether their safety-net welfare benefits will be terminated if they fail to make the journey.”
Prior to bringing suit, in accordance with its policy of avoiding litigation where possible, Legal Aid sought to persuade the City not to impose this burden on the disabled. Unfortunately, the City refused, making a suit necessary. After bringing the suit, plaintiffs’ counsel asked the City to refrain from transferring any more disabled people’s cases to the hubs pending resolution of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The City again refused, until Judge Swaim made it clear that, absent the City’s agreement, the Court would likely enter a temporary restraining order to the same effect. Judge Swaim has now certified a plaintiff class of persons affected or who might be affected by the WeCARE program and has preliminarily enjoined further transfers. The Court also ordered the City to consult with Legal Aid and Milbank to create a plan to allow approximately 23,000 individuals whose cases were already transferred to hubs to resume dealing with their neighborhood centers.
Milbank attorneys on this matter are Kevin Ashby, Scott Edelman, and Carolyn Walker-Diallo. From Legal Aid were Katie Kelleher, Ken Stephens, Susan Welber, Richard Blum, Kyla Ratliff, and Scott Rosenberg.