RALEIGH -- The federal government said in a legal filing Wednesday that state budget cuts to programs that help people with mental illness and developmental disabilities live on their own violate the individuals' civil rights.
This month, the advocacy group Disability Rights North Carolina sued the state Department of Health and Human Services in federal court over the cuts. which slashes state money that helps the disabled pay for home health care, rent and other expenses.
The lawsuit got a boost Wednesday when the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief supporting the case and asked a federal judge to issue an injunction against the state.
Disability Rights filed the suit Dec.11 on behalf of Marlo M. and Durwood W., two North Carolina residents who rely on state services to live in their communities rather than an institution. Their last names are withheld in the legal filings to ensure their medical privacy.
"We're very pleased the Department of Justice has decided to weigh in in favor of our two clients and their ability to stay in the community, rather than be institutionalized somewhere," said John Rittelmeyer, the chief legal counsel for Disability Rights.
A preliminary hearing in the case will be held in U.S. District Court in Raleigh on Monday.
Renee McCoy, a spokeswoman for the state Health and Human Services department, said Wednesday that she could not comment on pending litigation.
Durwood W., 49, has lived in his own apartment for the past 10 years as the recipient of federal and state Thomas S. dollars. The funding is, named after a class action lawsuit that successfully challenged the lack of services available to people with both intellectual disabilities and mental illness. Marlo M., 39, has lived in her own apartment for more than five years, supported by federal and state dollars.
Legislators exempted Thomas S. clients from most of the severe cuts in the current state budget. But they did not mandate that these services be preserved. Local community mental health agencies have enacted further cuts and restrictions.
The Beacon Center, the mental health management agency for Edgecombe, Greene, Nash and Wilson counties, is the agency making the service cuts affecting Durwood and Marlo, who require access to 24-hour-a-day care to live in their apartments.
In its lawsuit, Disability Rights argues that the loss of these state-funded services will likely result in their relocation to an institution, such as a state mental hospital or a group home, thus violating what is known as the Olmstead decision. In that landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that unnecessary institutionalization of peoople with disabilities is a form of discrimination under the federal Americans With Disabilities Act.
There are thousands of Thomas S. clients in North Carolina, Rittelmeyer said. Though the lawsuit directly concerns the fate of the two people listed as plaintiffs in the case, it is hoped that a ruling in their favor could prevent others from facing similar service cuts.
Last year, Disability Rights successfully petitioned a Wake County judge to issue a restraining order forbidding the state from closingDorothea Dix Hospital in Raleigh.
Funding not protected
In its brief Wednesday, lawyers for the U.S. Justice Department wrote that North Carolina's lack of protections for Thomas S. funding violates federal law. Further, they say the budget cuts will likely result in Durwood and Marlo ending up in institutions, where it will cost taxpayers even more to care for them.
"By supporting the plaintiffs in this case, we seek to ensure that the civil rights of individuals with mental illness and developmental disabilities in North Carolina are protected," Thomas E. Perez, an assistant attorney general, said in a prepared statement.
"North Carolina has provided critical services to disabled individuals with significant needs, allowing them to fully participate in their communities. Now cuts to these services threaten to take this away at a cost to the plaintiffs and the state."
Justice has recently filed briefs in support of similar Olmstead cases in Florida, Connecticut, Virginia and New York.
