{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023076923076923078, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.195767195767195, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reasonable accommodations for individuals regarded as having disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Why "No" should not be the answer.

This Article will first identify and discuss the arguments courts have relied upon to determine that individuals regarded as disabled are entitled to accommodations. The Article will then discuss the arguments proffered by courts that have reached the opposite conclusion. Next, the Article will analyze the major federal cases addressing this issue. Finally, the Article will suggest that a bright-line rule denying accommodations in these cases is not the correct way to apply the ADA, and that in most cases, individuals regarded as disabled should be entitled to an accommodation. If, however, courts are unwilling to adopt a bright-line rule requiring accommodations, courts could use a multi-factor test to determine this issue on a case-by-case basis. Regardless of which suggestion courts adopt, an across-the-board refusal to provide accommodations to individuals regarded as disabled is flawed and does not further the purposes of the "landmark" legislation President Bush signed into law sixteen years ago.