OFFICIAL OPINION No. 35

OFFICIAL OPINION No. 35 Blind persons-Exclusion from places of public accommodation due to guide dogs. 1. 1967 amendments to the Human Relations Act, 43 P. S. § 951 et seq. con- cerning findings and declaration of policy, recognized broadly the practice of discrimination against individuals or groups by reason of their race, color, or religious creed, ancestry and use of guide dogs because of the blindness of the user is a matter of concern to the Commonwealth, and that it is the public policy of the Commonwealth to safeguard all the individuals all their rights at places of public accommodation. 2. It is to be noted that Section 5(i), 43 P. S. § 954(1), of the Human Relations Act setting forth unlawful discriminatory practices with respect to places of public accommodation, resort, or amusement, was not amended so as to include a reference to these guide dogs. Thus, in order to achieve a fully and forcible policy, an amendment of Section 5(i) would be desirable. The Honorable Ernest P. Kline Lieutenant Governor of Pennsylvania Room 200-Main Capitol Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Dear Governor Kline: Harrisburg, Pa., May 25, 1971 Thank you for your letter of May 13th attaching Mr. McMichael's letter to you of May 1 lth. 60 OPINIONS OF 1'HE A ITORNEY GENERAL Mr. McMichael's concern, and yours, relating to his exclusion from a place of public accommodation because he was accompanied by his guide dog, is understandable. The trouble arises from the peculiar wording of the amendments relating to guide dogs made to the Human Relations Act, Act of October 27, 1955, P. L. 744, 43 P. S. § 951 et seq., by the Act of August 11, 1967, P. L. 208, 43 P. S. 953. While this Act amends Section 2 of the Human Relations Act con- cerning Findings and Declaration of Policy by recognizing broadly that the practice of discrimination against individuals or groups by reason of their race, color, religious creed, ancestry and use of guide dogs because of blindness of the user, etc., is a matter of concern to the Commonwealth, and tihat it is the public policy of the Commonwealth to safeguard all individuals their rights at places of public accommo- dation; and to secure commercial housing regardless of race, etc., and use of guide dogs because of blindness of the user, the following guide dog amendments appear to limit the civil right to the use of guide dogs because of blindness of the user to accommodations and advan- tages with respect to commercial housing. See Sections 3, 5(a)(l), ( 3 ) , ( 5) and ( 6) . It is to be noted that Section 5 (i), 43 P. S. § 954 (2), setting forth unlawful discriminatory practices with respect to places of public ac- commodation, resort or amusement, was not amended so as to include a reference to the use of guide dogs. I have asked Mr. Ralph E. Beistline, Acting Director of the Bureau of the Visually and Physically Handicapped, Department of Public Welfare, to contact the Belmont Lounge to request the owner to com- ply with the policy of the Commonwealth relating to the use of guide dogs as expressed in the Human Relations Act. However, in order to achieve a fully enforceable policy, I suggest that an amendment of Section 5 (i) would be desirable, and your expression of interest in such an amendment would, I am sure, be most helpful. Sincerely, J. SHANE CREAMER, Attorney General. OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 61