Case #54: School Board of Nassau Cty., Fla. V. Arline 1) What are the two legal questions presented in this case (as stated by the Court in the first paragraph ofthe opinion)? 2) Why did the School Board fire Gene Arline? 3) In Part II of its opinion, the Court discusses certain regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services. Why, according to the Court, are these regulations "an important source of guidance\" for the Court in interpreting the Rehabilitation Act? 4) In Part III, the Court discusses whether Arline meets the definition of \"disabled" found in 29 U.S.C. 706(7)(B), which expands the category of persons considered "disabled" to include: "[A]ny person who (i) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities, (ii) has a record ofsuch an impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an impairment." According to the Court's analysis in Part III. which of the three disability types does Arline have? 5) As the Court explains, the Petitioners (defendants) in this case \"concede that Arline's hospitalization for tuberculosis in 1957 demonstrates that she has a record of a physical impairment.\" What, then, did the Petitioners argue in this case? 6) Why did the Court reject Petitioners' argument? 7) In Part IV, the Court addressed the second issue in this case, i.e., \"whether Arline is otherwise qualified for the job of elementary schoolteacher." This serves as a reminder that even though a person suffering from a contagious disease like tuberculosis can meet the definition of \"disability," that individual might lose all protection from disability discrimination by not being "otherwise qualified" for the job. Factors to consider in that inquiry include (a) the nature ofthe risk (how the disease is transmitted), (b) the duration ofthe risk (how long is the carrier infectious), (c)the severity of the risk (what is the potential harm to third parties) and (d) the probabilities the disease will be transmitted and will cause varying degrees of harm. In the end the Court was unable to reach a decision on that issue in this particular case because ofa lack of factual findings by the District Court. Nevertheless, one can infer from the Court's analysis that if someone like Gene Arline was found to be highly contagious and if the risk of serious medical harm to the children in her classroom was substantial and could not be eliminated through reasonable accommodations, she would no longer be "qualified\" for herjob, thereby giving her employer the right to terminate her. Indeed, the Court stated in a footnote: \"A person who poses a significant risk of communicating an infectious disease to others in the workplace will not be otherwise qualified for his or herjob if reasonable accommodation will not eliminate that risk. The Act would not require a school board to place a teacherwith active, contagious tuberculosis in a classroom with elementary schoolchildren.\" Does this seem fair to you? Why or why not? 8) It is important to determine what the Arline case means for employers who might wish to fire someone for being infected with COVID719. Breaking this overall question into its various steps, please answer the following questions to the best of your ability: 3. Could a person infected with COVID719 be considered "disabled\" under the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Arline? b. Can a person infected with COVID719 be fired on the basis that they are no longer "qualified" for the job as a result of their infection? In answering this question, consider the EEOC's guidance in footnote 10 above, paying careful attention to the concepts of "direct threat\" and \"reasonable accommodation.\" c. Might the answer to the previous question (b) change depending on the nature of the particular job at issue, whether working from home is a viable option, the types of coeworkers an employee has at work, etc.? d. Does any ofthis even matter in light of the right to take jobeprotected leave under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), as well as the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)