Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 670.0

524US2

Unit: $U96

[09-15-00 14:39:49] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 524 U. S. 624 (1998)

625

Syllabus

§ 12201(a), this Court must construe the ADA to grant at least as much
protection as the regulations implementing the Rehabilitation Act.
Pp. 631–632.

(b) From the moment of infection and throughout every stage of
the disease, HIV infection satisﬁes the statutory and regulatory deﬁni-
tion of a “physical impairment.” Applicable Rehabilitation Act regula-
tions deﬁne “physical or mental impairment” to mean “any physiological
disorder or condition . . . affecting . . . the . . . body[’s] . . . hemic and
lymphatic [systems].” HIV infection falls well within that deﬁnition.
The medical literature reveals that the disease follows a predictable and
It causes imme-
unalterable course from infection to inevitable death.
diate abnormalities in a person’s blood, and the infected person’s white
cell count continues to drop throughout the course of the disease, even
during the intermediate stage when its attack is concentrated in the
lymph nodes. Thus, HIV infection must be regarded as a physiological
disorder with an immediate, constant, and detrimental effect on the
hemic and lymphatic systems. Pp. 632–637.

(c) The life activity upon which respondent relies, her ability to
reproduce and to bear children, constitutes a “major life activity” under
the ADA. The plain meaning of the word “major” denotes comparative
importance and suggests that the touchstone is an activity’s signiﬁcance.
Reproduction and the sexual dynamics surrounding it are central to the
life process itself. Petitioner’s claim that Congress intended the ADA
only to cover those aspects of a person’s life that have a public, economic,
or daily character founders on the statutory language. Nothing in the
deﬁnition suggests that activities without such a dimension may some-
how be regarded as so unimportant or insigniﬁcant as not to be “major.”
This interpretation is conﬁrmed by the Rehabilitation Act regulations,
which provide an illustrative, nonexhaustive list of major life ac-
Inclusion on that list of activities such as caring for one’s
tivities.
self, performing manual tasks, working, and learning belies the sugges-
tion that a task must have a public or economic character. On the con-
trary, the regulations support the inclusion of reproduction, which could
not be regarded as any less important than working and learning.
Pp. 637–639.

(d) Respondent’s HIV infection “substantially limits” her major life
activity within the ADA’s meaning. Although the Rehabilitation Act
regulations provide little guidance in this regard, the Court’s evaluation
of the medical evidence demonstrates that an HIV-infected woman’s
ability to reproduce is substantially limited in two independent ways: If
she tries to conceive a child, (1) she imposes on her male partner a
statistically signiﬁcant risk of becoming infected; and (2) she risks in-
fecting her child during gestation and childbirth, i. e., perinatal trans-