What It Took to Get to the DOJ v. Uber Lawsuit

A close-up of a person holding a smartphone displaying the Uber app logo. The phone is held in one hand inside a vehicle.

I’ve been denied rides with my service dog more times than I can count.

Not because I was unclear. Not because the law wasn’t on my side. But because a driver could take one look at us and decide: nope. And Uber, no matter what it says in press releases, let them.

Over the years, drivers have challenged me to file complaints, knowing nothing would happen. And they were mostly right. I started documenting the rejections publicly in 2018. I called it “rejection time,” the extra hour I’d build into my schedule just to find a driver who wouldn’t leave me at the curb.

If I needed to be somewhere at 1pm, I’d call a ride by noon. Not because the drive took that long, but because I had to plan for the fight.

Once, before Uber Pet was even a backup option, I was in such a rush I paid for an Uber Black. It cost exponentially more than UberX, just to avoid being denied again. I paid a premium to be treated like I belonged.

This wasn’t rare. It was weekly. Sometimes daily. And when I shared my experiences, the pushback came fast:

“You’re overreacting.”
“Maybe try Uber Pet.”
“Why didn’t you just leave the dog at home?”

Lovey isn’t a pet. She’s a highly trained service dog from Canine Companions®. She’s my access partner. Before her, it was Pico, my first service dog, who stood next to me through the worst of this. I still wish his name could be in the court record.

On Thursday, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Uber for violating the ADA, denying rides to people like me. My name is in the complaint. CBS News covered it and quoted me saying what I’ve felt for years:

“The incidents are not isolated, but evidence of a widespread civil rights failure.”

“No one should be forced to choose between their mobility and their legal rights.”

It’s validating to be heard. But also exhausting that it took this long.

This lawsuit isn’t just about one company. It’s about a culture of compliance theater that leaves disabled people behind. And then expects us to be grateful for the ride when it finally shows up.

What I want now is simple: real enforcement. Not just good PR. Because access isn’t a suggestion. It’s the floor.

If you’ve never had to schedule rejection time, count yourself lucky. If you have, I see you.

And I hope you’ll answer this:

When have you had to shrink yourself just to get through the day?

What does accountability look like where you work, not just in writing, but in action?

Uber denies rides to passengers with disabilities, Justice Department claims in lawsuit

The ADA Under Siege? What the Supreme Court’s Latest Ruling Means for Disability Rights

A pull quote from Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, “it would be deeply unfortunate if the Equal Protection Clause actually demanded this perverse, ahistorical, and counterproductive outcome.”

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn race-conscious admissions in colleges has left me, as a disability advocate, deeply concerned. The ruling, which challenges affirmative action, makes me wonder: What does this mean for other minority groups, especially the disabled community?

With this ruling, the Supreme Court continues its historic march backward on civil rights; seemingly hellbent on taking them all back piece by piece.

Will Hild of Consumers'​ Research told The Washington Post the ruling “will put the wind in the sails of groups like ours, who want to get the woke, racially based hiring and promotion schemes out of corporate America.” This statement raises alarm bells. If the court is willing to challenge affirmative action, is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) next?

Furthermore, Hild mentions that legal precedents allowing race-conscious admissions have been a “fig leaf” for private sector diversity initiatives. With this ruling, he predicts a “free-for-all on pushing back against that.” This suggests that the ruling could embolden challenges to diversity initiatives across the board, including those aimed at disability inclusion.

In a scorching dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that “the devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated.” She added that the decision “cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote in her dissent that “it would be deeply unfortunate if the Equal Protection Clause actually demanded this perverse, ahistorical, and counterproductive outcome.”

The ADA has been a cornerstone for disability rights, ensuring equal opportunities for people like me. I am one of the 61 million disabled adults in the United States. As a wheelchair user and service dog handler to Canine Companions® Pico, the ADA has been instrumental in my life. But this ruling might embolden groups to challenge not just racial diversity but diversity as a whole.

We must remain vigilant and proactive. The progress we’ve made in disability rights is monumental, but it’s also fragile. We must ensure that this ruling does not become a precedent for eroding the protections that the ADA provides.

As we enter Disability Pride Month, as we celebrate Independence Day, we must not become complacent. I urge you all to stay informed, engage in discussions, and stand up for the rights of all minority groups. Our diversity is our strength. Let’s protect it.

#DisabilityRights #SupremeCourt #ADA #ProtectDiversity #AffirmativeAction #SCOTUS #CivilRights #StayInformed #EngageInChange #DEI #DEIA #DisabilityPride