; and (B) intended that the ADA assure full participation and independent living for individuals with disabilities by addressing discrimination against individuals with disabilities [that] persists in critical areas , including institutionalization. (2) While Congress expected that the ADA’s integration mandate would be interpreted in a manner that ensures that individuals who are eligible for institutional placement are able to exercise a right to community-based long-term services and supports, that expectation has not been fulfilled. (3) The holdings of the Supreme Court in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), and companion cases, have clearly articulated that individuals with disabilities have a civil right under the ADA to participate in society as equal citizens. However, many States still do not provide sufficient community-based long-term services and supports to individuals with disabilities to end segregation in institutions. (4) The right to live in the community is necessary for the exercise of the civil rights that the ADA was intended to secure for all individuals with disabilities. The lack of adequate community-based services and supports has imperiled the civil rights of all individuals with disabilities, and has undermined the very promise of the ADA. It is, therefore, necessary to recognize in statute a robust and fully articulated right to community living. (5) States, with a few exceptions, continue to approach decisions regarding long-term services and supports from social welfare and budgetary perspectives, but for the promise of the ADA to be fully realized, States must approach these decisions from a civil rights perspective. (6) States have not consistently planned to ensure sufficient services and supports for individuals with disabilities, including those with the most significant disabilities, to enable individuals with disabilities to live in the most integrated setting. As a result, many individuals with disabilities who reside in institutions are prevented from residing in the