2:22-cv-02371
E.D. La.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Kendra Greenwald, who has an intellectual disability due to a worsening seizure disorder, is subject to Louisiana’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) following a 2012 conviction.
- Greenwald has difficulty complying with SORNA’s requirements due to severe intellectual limitations and memory loss, leading to her repeated arrests and detentions for noncompliance.
- She was found incompetent to stand trial in 2015 and later declared an "unrestorable incompetent," yet has continued to face arrest for SORNA violations.
- Greenwald sued state and city officials, claiming SORNA's application to her violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and her substantive due process rights.
- The district court previously dismissed her ADA claim, and Greenwald sought reconsideration; only her substantive due process claim remained pending.
- The court denied reconsideration of the ADA claim but certified the question for interlocutory appeal due to its novelty.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA coverage of SORNA | SORNA is a "service, program, or activity" requiring reasonable ADA accommodations | SORNA is not a benefit or service under the ADA; it merely imposes legal requirements | SORNA not covered by ADA |
| Applicable ADA precedent | Analogizes SORNA to arrests/prisons, which are covered by ADA | ADA case law limited to services offering a benefit, not legal obligations like SORNA | Plaintiff’s reliance misplaced |
| Modification of requirements | Modifications required under ADA due to disability | No duty to modify criminal registration for disabilities | No such duty under ADA |
| Reconsideration of ADA dismissal | ADA claim should proceed based on disability discrimination | No new basis to alter prior dismissal | Reconsideration denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Penn. Dep’t of Corr. v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206 (Title II of ADA applies to prisons as public entities with programs/services that benefit prisoners)
- Hainze v. Richards, 207 F.3d 795 (ADA does not require accommodations during police responses until scene is secure)
- Delano-Pyle v. Victoria Cnty, Tex., 302 F.3d 567 (ADA may require accommodation during law enforcement activities once custody is established)
- Frame v. City of Arlington, 657 F.3d 215 (Defines "program or activity" as operations of a local government under the ADA)