Summary
A 2007 court ruling affirmed that drug addiction is recognized as a disability, but only for individuals who are not actively using illicit substances. Concurrently, the court invalidated zoning regulations that overtly discriminated against methadone treatment clinics.
Summary
In a significant 2007 legal ruling, the court addressed two key issues concerning individuals with drug addiction. The judiciary reaffirmed that drug addiction can be recognized as a disability, but this status applies exclusively to those who are not actively engaged in substance use. Furthermore, the court invalidated zoning regulations that were explicitly discriminatory against methadone clinics, deeming such laws unlawful.
Summary
In a 2007 court case, judges confirmed that drug addiction can be classified as a disability, but only if the individual is not currently using drugs. The court also overturned zoning regulations that directly discriminated against methadone clinics.
Summary
In a court case from 2007, a judge made two important decisions. The judge said that drug addiction can be a disability, but only if the person is not using drugs at that time. The judge also stopped rules that unfairly kept methadone clinics from opening in certain areas.