A legal challenge has been launched in Florida against a controversial new state law that grants pregnant women access to designated accessible parking spaces.
The Lawsuit and Its Core Argument
Olivia Keller, a Leon County resident who uses a power wheelchair, has filed a lawsuit against Florida. Keller, who was born without arms, argues that the 2025 law exacerbates the existing shortage of accessible parking for people with permanent mobility disabilities. The law allows expecting mothers to obtain a temporary disabled parking permit for $15, valid for one year.
In her suit, Keller contends that pregnancy does not meet the legal definition of a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). She asserts that Florida cannot undermine this federal definition by extending parking accommodations meant for individuals with disabilities to pregnant women. "These are spaces that we need in order to function in our day-to-day lives," Keller told WSVN, emphasising that the access aisles next to these spots are essential for her to exit her vehicle independently.
Legislative Origins and Public Reaction
The provision was passed as part of a broad transportation bill, SB 462, which received unanimous support in both the Florida House and Senate in 2025. The idea originated with Republican State Representative Fiona McFarland from Sarasota, who conceived it while nine months pregnant. She described "waddling" across hot car parks and wanted to help other women avoid similar discomfort.
However, McFarland herself stated, "I feel very strongly that pregnancy is not a disability. I just want to be able to park up front." This admission is central to Keller's legal challenge. Public reaction to the law has been divided, with some praising its compassion for pregnant women, while others, including disability advocates, fear it will reduce vital parking access for those who rely on it.
Legal Proceedings and Broader Implications
The state of Florida has already moved to dismiss Keller's lawsuit, but a judge rejected that initial request, allowing the case to proceed. Opponents of the law stress they do not wish to create conflict but advocate for a separate solution that addresses the needs of pregnant women without compromising access for the disabled community.
Keller's case highlights the tension between accommodating temporary conditions and protecting resources legally mandated for individuals with permanent disabilities. The outcome could set a significant precedent regarding how states interpret and apply the definitions within the ADA for parking and other public accommodations.
