Court Rejects DC Request To Toss Mental Health Crisis Response Case

A federal judge rejected Washington DC’s request to dismiss a lawsuit targeting the city’s response to mental health crises.

At a Glance

A judge denied DC’s request to dismiss a lawsuit over the city’s mental health crisis response.
The lawsuit was filed by Bread for the City with the ACLU.
The lawsuit claims police responses often worsen mental health crises.
The ACLU accuses DC of violating the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The ruling allows the case to proceed to discovery, but mediation meetings are ongoing.

Judge’s Ruling Against DC’s Request

A federal judge has denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against the District of Columbia’s practice of dispatching police officers to respond to mental health emergencies. This legal challenge was initiated by the nonprofit organization Bread for the City, with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The plaintiffs argue that the involvement of armed police in these crises frequently exacerbates the situation and endangers vulnerable individuals.

The lawsuit contends that the District’s approach stands in violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA prohibits systems from discriminating against mentally disabled individuals by denying them the benefits of emergency services. The plaintiffs seek the deployment of trained mental health providers instead of police officers in crisis scenarios.

The city issued its motion to dismiss based on a previous ruling in the FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine case, in which doctors and medical groups targeted the FDA’s expansion of mifepristone, an abortion drug. The court ultimately tossed that case, stating the medical groups didn’t have a right to sue because they sustained no injury as a result of the FDA’s decision.

On the other hand, Bread for the City argued that it was forced to start providing mental health services itself, which took time and resources away from the non-profit’s actual mission — to provide food, health care, and clothing to the homeless population. This, the judge argued, counts as injury and gives the non-profit the standing it needs to pursue its case.

A federal judge denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against Washington, D.C.'s practice of sending police officers to respond to mental health emergencies on Tuesday. @ryan_knappy https://t.co/7eWiLC17tx

— Courthouse News (@CourthouseNews) September 11, 2024

Impact on Emergency Response Practices

The ACLU asserts that police officers, lacking specialized training for such situations, can be a trigger for individuals in crisis. The judge’s ruling acknowledges this concern, emphasizing that the District’s current practices often lead to the escalation of these emergencies. Less than 1% of 911 calls for mental health crises receive a response from mental health professionals, DOJ attorneys said previously.

“Relying on mental health professionals, not armed police, to serve people experiencing mental health crises is not just logical, it’s required under the law,” Michael Perloff of the ACLU said in statement. “Today’s decision made clear that communities can’t single out mental health emergencies for worse services than other health emergencies.”

The plaintiffs argue that the city’s approach discriminates against people with mental health disabilities, violating both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. The ADA prohibits denying equal services to qualified individuals with disabilities, while the Rehabilitation Act bans discrimination by federally funded programs. According to the lawsuit, the District employs community response teams (CRTs) but lacks the necessary funding, training, or coordination to make these teams effective.

Towards Resolution: Next Steps in the Case

The judge’s decision allows the case to proceed to the discovery process, while mediation meetings are set to continue. Both parties have acknowledged issues with the current system, but progress in mediation has been slow due to the city’s reluctance. Future mediation meetings are proposed for late September, presenting an opportunity for a negotiated settlement.

If the case succeeds, it may have significant implications for policing in DC. Could this set a precedent that impacts how authorities operate across the U.S.?