Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 256.0

524US1

Unit: $U83

[09-06-00 20:30:03] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 524 U. S. 206 (1998)

211

Opinion of the Court

Petitioners argue that the words “eligibility” and “participa-
tion” imply voluntariness on the part of an applicant who
seeks a beneﬁt from the State, and thus do not connote pris-
oners who are being held against their will. This is wrong
on two counts: First, because the words do not connote vol-
untariness. See, e. g., Webster’s New International Diction-
ary 831 (2d ed. 1949) (“eligible”: “Fitted or qualiﬁed to be
chosen or elected; legally or morally suitable; as, an eligible
candidate”); id., at 1782 (“participate”: “To have a share in
common with others; to partake; share, as in a debate”).
While “eligible” individuals “participate” voluntarily in many
programs, services, and activities, there are others for which
they are “eligible” in which “participation” is mandatory. A
drug addict convicted of drug possession, for example, might,
as part of his sentence, be required to “participate” in a drug
treatment program for which only addicts are “eligible.”
And secondly, even if the words did connote voluntariness, it
would still not be true that all prison “services,” “programs,”
and “activities” are excluded from the ADA because partici-
pation in them is not voluntary. The prison law library, for
example, is a service (and the use of it an activity), which
prisoners are free to take or leave. Cf. Gabel v. Lynaugh,
835 F. 2d 124, 125, n. 1 (CA5 1988) (per curiam) (“pro se civil
rights litigation has become a recreational activity for state
In the very case at hand, the governing law
prisoners”).
makes it clear that participation in the Boot Camp program
is voluntary. See Pa. Stat. Ann., Tit. 61, § 1126(a) (Purdon
Supp. 1998) (“An eligible inmate may make an application to
the motivational boot camp selection committee for permis-
sion to participate in the motivational boot camp program”);
§ 1126(c) (“[c]onditio[n]” of “participa[tion]” is that applicant
“agree to be bound by” certain “terms and conditions”).

Finally, petitioners point out that the statute’s statement
of ﬁndings and purpose, 42 U. S. C. § 12101, does not mention
prisons and prisoners. That is perhaps questionable, since
the provision’s reference to discrimination “in such critical