How is someone supposed to respond to an abstract question without analogy to similar questions? The ADA only demands "reasonable accommodation," and frankly th

How is someone supposed to respond to an abstract question without analogy to similar questions? The ADA only demands "reasonable accommodation," and frankly that's what we are arguing about: what is "reasonable?" Our law provides many special cases when the entity is engaging in non-profit activities: taxes, labor requirements, among others. So you ask why non-commercial should entities be excluded from accessibility requirements: because they already get excluded from other onerous requirements we place on businesses, and it seems like a "reasonable" line to draw. Maybe you don't find it reasonable, but now it's up to a court decide.