Supreme Court of the United States

Albertson’s, Inc. v. Kirkingburg

June 22, 1999527 U.S. 555

Summary

Justice Souter's opinion held that Albertson's could insist on compliance with the Department of Transportation's binding vision standard without independently justifying that standard under the ADA, despite an experimental waiver program that did not substantively modify the standard. That conclusion was unanimous. In Part II, joined by all Justices except Stevens and Breyer, the Court also held that monocular vision is not a per se disability: substantial limitations must be assessed individually, taking account of the body's compensating mechanisms. Justice Thomas concurred separately without any noted joiners, explaining that he would prefer to resolve the case on the ground that Kirkingburg was not a qualified individual, while joining the Court's opinion on the understanding that it left that alternative analysis open.

Holding

  • Whether monocular vision constitutes a disability per se under the ADA.. Monocular individuals must establish that their impairment substantially limits a major life activity in their own circumstances; compensating mechanisms of the body must be considered.
  • Whether the experimental DOT waiver program required Albertson's to justify enforcing the otherwise applicable federal vision standard.. Albertson's was entitled to enforce the binding federal vision standard without independently defending its application under the ADA merely because an experimental waiver was available.

Docket 98-591

Cited authorities

  • 42 U.S.C. §§ 12113
  • Rule 14.1(a)
  • CA10
  • 63 FR 66226
  • 104 Stat. 327
  • 42 U.S.C. § 12101
  • 35 FR 6458
  • 57 FR 6793

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF