The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“ADA DRIVEBY LAWSUITS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S6873 on Dec. 8, 2016.
The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
ADA DRIVEBY LAWSUITS
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. President, in a driveby lawsuit, an attorney will drive by a place of business and look for technical ADA violations. These are usually minor violations that are easily correctable, like the width of a parking space or the height of a van accessible sign.
Oftentimes, if a technical violation exists, the attorney will either send a demand letter or threaten the business with a lawsuit. Oftentimes, the demand letter will request a settlement that is just under what it would cost the business to litigate, so the business owner picks the lesser of the two evils and pays the settlement.
The scope of the problem is only growing. From the first 6 months of 2015 to the first 6 months of 2016, there was a 63-percent increase in the number of suits filed under title III of the ADA. This year is on pace to see almost 7,000 of these cases brought forward--7,000. Compare 7,000 to the 4,800 lawsuits filed in 2015 and 2,700 in 2013, and we can see what a boon this has been for trial lawyers. In fact, this past Sunday, ``60 Minutes'' did a special report on driveby lawsuits and the toll they are taking on small businesses throughout the country. I would encourage anyone to watch that piece. It explains the problem very well.
While California, Florida, and New York have the highest incidents of these driveby lawsuits, my home State of Arizona has seen a dramatic increase in these suits over the last 3 years. In 2013, there were three ADA title III suits brought in Arizona--three. By 2015, that number was up to 207. As of September of this year, Arizona has already seen 284.
It is clear that the problem is only getting worse. My legislation would go a long way to solve it. If enacted, property owners must first be given notice of their alleged ADA violation, at which point they would have 120 days to cure the violation before a lawsuit could be brought. If the property owner fails to address the violation in a timely manner, then they can be sued. The bill also instructs the Department of Justice to promote further ADA compliance through education so small business owners know what is expected of them. I think these reforms will help business owners and persons with disabilities achieve their mutual goal of ADA compliance.
The ADA has been a great success in its 25-year history. It is essential that business owners continue to see it as a tool to ensure fairness for people with disabilities and not as a weapon to line the pockets of unscrupulous lawyers.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for 10 minutes.
____________________
