Federal Court Upholds Ruling in Favor of Nursing Facility Residents, AARP Foundation

Judge reaffirms that the District of Columbia failed to offer residents in-home care they were entitled to

Emily Paulin,

Updated August 27, 2025

AARP

Comments

Published January 02, 2025

/ Updated August 27, 2025

male caregiver chatting with older woman on a couch

Getty Images

Nursing facility residents in the District of Columbia should soon have better access to in-home care services, allowing them to live independently if they choose to, thanks to a new ruling in a class-action lawsuit that AARP Foundation has been working on for more than 15 years.

On August 15, a federal judge reaffirmed his previous ruling that D.C. failed to offer and help facilitate in-home care alternatives that nursing facility residents were entitled to. District officials had challenged that ruling. As a result, the court’s order stands, and District officials must move forward with reforms to ensure that nursing facility residents with disabilities who would prefer to live in the community are given real, systematic opportunities to do so.

AARP Foundation, which has represented hundreds of nursing facility residents as plaintiffs in the suit, applauded the judge’s ruling. “The federal court has ruled twice now that D.C. is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by not providing essential information and assistance to people in nursing facilities,” said Kelly Bagby, AARP Foundation’s vice president of litigation.

“The implications for our clients are enormous,” Bagby added. “There are thousands of D.C. citizens who are waiting for the chance to live in their communities.”

Join Our Fight to Protect Older Americans

Here’s what you can do to help:

Sign up to become an AARP activist for the latest news and alerts on issues you care about.
Find out more about how we’re fighting for you every day in Congress and across the country.
AARP is your fierce defender on the issues that matter to people 50-plus. Become a member or renew your membership today.

A long-running case

AARP Foundation, a charitable affiliate of AARP, filed the lawsuit in 2010, alleging that between 500 and 2,900 people with disabilities in D.C. whose care was paid for by Medicaid were unnecessarily institutionalized in nursing facilities. AARP Foundation argued that state and local governments must provide community-based services to people with disabilities whenever possible, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1999 landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C.

After losing an initial trial in 2016, AARP Foundation successfully appealed, then went to trial again in 2021. During the second trial, one of the plaintiffs, an Army veteran named Larry McDonald, testified about living in a long-term care facility for 17 years and having no privacy or control over his daily life. He said he could cook for himself but needed help with other tasks, such as managing his medications and shopping for food. “I want my own place,” he told the court.

Most Popular

“A lot of the people in D.C. nursing facilities don’t even realize that this is a possibility for them,” explained AARP Foundation’s Bagby, the lead attorney on the case. “They’ve never been told that they don’t have to live out their days in a nursing facility.” AARP Foundation’s co-counsel for the lawsuit are Disability Rights D.C., the law firm of Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP, and attorney Marjorie Rifkin.

Meanwhile, attorneys for the D.C. government contended that the District already had a comprehensive plan to place qualified people with disabilities in less restrictive settings, with a waiting list that moved at a reasonable pace.

In December 2024, federal judge Paul L. Friedman ruled that the District had indeed violated the ADA’s “integration mandate,” which requires governments to provide services in the most integrated setting possible. Judge Friedman issued an injunction requiring D.C. to ensure enough capacity in home- and community-based care programs so people can transition into them. He also ordered D.C. to create a system that regularly informs nursing facility residents about in-home care options, asks for and accommodates their preferences and tracks transitions.

The District asked Judge Friedman to alter or throw out his order in January 2025, claiming it went beyond what was necessary to provide relief to the plaintiff class and that part of it was too vague to follow, among other critiques. Friedman denied all of D.C.’s requests and left the injunction intact this month.

Although the court’s decision is binding only for Washington, D.C., the case is likely to have national influence, Bagby said. Federal judges in other parts of the country often look at how their colleagues have applied Olmstead v. L.C. when deciding similar cases. Now that states and localities know that courts are willing to impose systemwide injunctions, they may look to improve their own home- and community-based service systems to avoid similar litigation.

Also, if the D.C. government appeals the most recent decision, the case could go on to create binding precedent in the D.C. Circuit and possibly influence national disability rights law if it reaches the Supreme Court.

AARP Foundation works to end poverty for older adults and reduce financial hardship. Read more about the work of our AARP Foundation attorneys, who advocate for the legal rights and interests of people 50 and older.

%{postComment}%

Emily Paulin is an editor at aarp.org who covers nursing homes, health care, and federal and state policy. Her work has also appeared in Broadsheet, an Australian lifestyle publication.