DOJ Opinion Jeopardizes Civil Rights Protections Against Unnecessary Institutionalization for People with Disabilities

By Alayna Calabro, NLIHC Senior Policy Analyst

The U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal opinion on June 18 threatening the right of people with disabilities to live and receive services in the community, rather than be unnecessarily confined to institutions. The DOJ memo comes amid a broader effort by the Trump administration to withdraw federal support from proven programs, including community-based housing and services, and to expand the inhumane institutionalization of people experiencing homelessness and people with disabilities. 

About the DOJ Legal Opinion 

The DOJ opinion calls into question decades of civil rights protections for people with disabilities and aims to undermine one of the strongest protections against unnecessary institutionalization for people who can and want to live in their communities. The memo runs counter to long-standing legal precedent and could have far-reaching implications for people with disabilities, including higher rates of involuntary institutionalization. 

The memo targets Olmstead v. L.C., a landmark 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that unjustified segregation of people with disabilities constitutes discrimination under Title II of the “Americans with Disabilities Act.” Olmstead confirmed that people with disabilities have the right to receive services in the setting most appropriate to their needs. Individuals who are involuntarily institutionalized are rarely able to leave—consigning individuals who could otherwise live independently to reside in retirement or long-term care facilities away from their family, friends, and community, for the rest of their lives.  

The opinion claims that states are not legally required to provide services that help people with disabilities live in their communities. The DOJ itself acknowledges that its interpretation is “out of step” with how federal courts have understood Olmstead. The opinion is not a court decision and does not erase Olmstead or undo federal disability rights laws and regulations that protect community living. However, as The Arc explains, the opinion is “dangerous because it says the federal government may stop enforcing one of the strongest protections people with disabilities have against unnecessary institutionalization.” 

The Broader Context: The Trump Administration’s Efforts to Cut Funding for Community-Based Services, Expand Institutionalization, and Dismantle Civil Rights Protections 

The DOJ’s new interpretation of Olmstead is part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to make it easier for state and local governments to force people experiencing homelessness and those with disabilities into institutions. In July 2025, President Trump issued an executive order that called for forced institutionalization, withdrawing federal support for Housing First and mandating sobriety, among other harmful and ineffective policies for addressing homelessness. In March, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and DOJ signed a memorandum of understanding that could strip veterans, particularly those experiencing homelessness, of the right to make their own healthcare decisions (see Memo, 3/20). 

Federal regulations derived from Olmstead that require services to be provided in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of a person—including home- and community-based settings—have been a key obstacle to the Trump administration’s push for large-scale institutionalization of people experiencing homelessness. The DOJ opinion attempts to undermine this key protection. The memo also includes a footnote suggesting that disability laws have contributed to increases in homelessness, but it cites no evidence showing that Olmstead caused homelessness rates to increase. In fact, advocates and experts say that the Olmstead decision has been one of the most effective tools for providing housing and services to people experiencing chronic homelessness. Recent research from Brandeis University highlights how states have used Olmstead settlements to increase state funding for rental assistance for low-income people with disabilities, create permanent and integrated housing units, and access state funds for supportive housing services and Medicaid waiver-funded Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS). 

These actions also come as Republicans have passed drastic cuts to vital safety net programs, including Medicaid, which is the primary source of funding for community-based services. The historic cuts to federal Medicaid spending passed last July will lead states to reduce spending on optional services, like HCBS. According to Justice in Aging, several states—including Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Nebraska, Utah, and North Carolina—have already proposed cuts to Medicaid HCBS. The DOJ memo gives states cover to cut these supports and rely on institutionalization instead, despite decades of research demonstrating that access to high-quality HCBS improves outcomes and reduces overall healthcare costs.  

The DOJ legal opinion also coincides with the Trump administration’s June 16 announcement that it would move oversight of special education and education-focused civil rights enforcement out of the Department of Education and to the Department of Health and Human Services and DOJ, respectively. A broad coalition of disability, civil rights, and education organizations strongly opposed the moves, warning that they “threaten decades of progress advancing educational, employment, and civil rights outcomes for students with disabilities.” 

Learn more about what the DOJ opinion means for disability rights and community living here. 

Read reporting from NPR and Bloomberg. 

Read a letter from disability, civil rights, and education organizations opposing the Trump administration’s transfer of special education and education-focused civil rights functions out of the Department of Education here.