National Association of the Deaf

On January 13, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard arguments in the Arizona disability discrimination case against Harkins movie theaters.  The judges seemed inclined to decide that the display of captions and transmission of audio description services is required by the Arizona state law against disability discrimination and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  The judges also seemed to think it was the right thing to do.  One judge told the movie theaters’ lawyer, “You can . . . be the good guys, or you can be dragged kicking and screaming and look like jerks.”

In 2006, after exhausting administrative requirements, the Arizona Attorney General (AG) filed a lawsuit based on Arizona disability discrimination law against Harkins theaters in Arizona (22 theaters / 262 screens).  Harkins provides only limited showings of open-captioned film prints.  The lawsuit seeks a “sufficient” number of caption display systems for people who are deaf or hard of hearing and audio descriptions systems for people who are blind or visually impaired.

In 2008, the district court dismissed the case.  The district court said that the ADA does not require movie theaters to provide auxiliary aids and services to display captions and transmit audio descriptions for its customers with sensory disabilities.  The district court also said that changing audio elements to a visual format or visual elements to an audio format alters the content of a movie theater’s services and is not required under the ADA.  An appeal of this decision was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  This is the first time any U.S. Court of Appeals has considered a movie theater access case for people who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind, or visually impaired.

The National Association of the Deaf (NAD), along with many other groups, filed “friend of the court” briefs that urged the Court of Appeals to reverse the district court’s decision.  In early 2009, The U.S. Department of Justice also filed a brief urging reversal of the district court’s decision.

Finally, on January 13, 2010, the Court of Appeals heard arguments to help them decide this case.  Many people who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind, or visually impaired were in the courtroom.  Lawyers from the Arizona AG’s office and the Arizona Center for Disability Law argued the case against Harkins movie theaters.  The court provided captioning and American Sign Language interpreters to ensure that deaf and hard of hearing people had access to this court proceeding.

For additional commentary, see “Banner Day in Court for People with Hearing Loss” and “Court Hears Argument about Audio Description and Captioning”.