October 2018 - Parks & Recreation - 38

LAW REVIEW

a great-majority of runners from
reaching State. The demanding
qualifying times established by the
IHSA exclude able-bodied and disabled runners alike, leaving 90%
of all runners, many thousands,
in fact, from participating at State
every year.
To demonstrate ADA discrimination, A.H. had argued that " the
world-record holders in his T-36
classification " could not meet the
IHSA's qualifying times. The federal appeals court, however, found
the ADA causation analysis (i.e.,
discrimination solely based on disability) would depend on whether
A.H. would necessarily qualify for
State if he were " not disabled. "

As noted by the federal appeals
court, the ADA also imposes a duty to
provide reasonable accommodations
to disabled individuals.
The fact that A.H. does not have
a chance to qualify as a disabled
runner does not establish that the
qualifying standards set by the
IHSA are the but-for cause of his
failure to qualify for State. While
A.H. is a gifted runner given his
disability, A.H. has not established
that, were he not disabled, he
would be among the 10 percent of
track and field athletes who qualify
for State each year.

Reasonable
Accommodation?
As noted by the federal appeals
court, the ADA also imposes a duty
to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled individuals. In
this instance, A.H. had requested
the IHSA create " a para-ambula36

Parks & Recreation

tory division, with qualifying time
standards that are better suited for
runners like him, at the Sectional
and State championship meet, as
well as the Road Race. " The issue
before the federal circuit court of
appeals was, therefore, whether
the requested accommodation was
" reasonable " under the ADA.
As cited by the court, " an accommodation is unreasonable if
it imposes significant financial or
administrative costs, or it fundamentally alters the nature of the
program or service. "
A.H. had claimed his requested
accommodations would not impose such financial or administrative burdens on IHSA. In so doing,
he had noted " the IHSA already
has separate divisions in track and
field for female runners, wheelchair
athletes, and runners from smaller
schools. "

Fundamental Alteration
of Competition
According to the appeals court,
IHSA had never claimed that " creating a para-ambulatory division
would be burdensome in this way, "
(i.e., imposing significant financial
or administrative costs). Instead,
IHSA claimed " A.H.'s lower qualifying time standards would undermine the competitiveness of the
State championship meet and the
Road Race. " Specifically, IHSA
argued that implementation of
A.H.'s proposed accommodations
would " fundamentally alter the
nature of the State championship
track competition and Road Race,
because they would guarantee
A.H. increased participation and
success. "
In response, A.H. claimed he
was " not seeking lower time stan-

| O C T O B E R 2 0 1 8 | W W W. PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N . O R G

dards for all runners, but rather the
creation of a para-ambulatory division. " The appeals court rejected
this argument:
The fact that A.H.'s proposed
accommodations would not affect
the qualifying times of able-bodied
runners is of no consequence. The
creation of a new division would
lower the current qualifying times
and make it easier for certain runners to qualify for State or medal
in the Road Race.
Citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the federal appeals court
recognized that " lowering particular eligibility or qualifying requirements established by an entity can
be substantial modifications that
are unreasonable. " In particular,
the appeals court acknowledged
that " a fundamental alteration "
of a sporting event " occurs either
through a significant change that
affects all athletes alike, but alters
an essential aspect of the game; or,
through a peripheral change that
gives a disabled athlete an advantage over others. "
According to the IHSA, " the
qualifying time standards ensure
a certain level of competition and
maintain a necessary scarcity of
opportunity. " The appeals court
agreed. In the opinion of the court,
a new division of runners with
lower qualifying times for State
" would fundamentally alter the essential nature of the Sectional and
State track and field meets, as well
as the Road Race. "
The essential nature of a track
and field race is to run a designated
distance in the shortest time possible. The IHSA's time standards,
which govern which runners can
qualify for the State championship,
underscore the essence of the sport:

October 2018 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2018 - Parks & Recreation