Jordan Braun, a medical student enrolled in St. George University School of Medicine’s Doctor of Medicine program, filed suit alleging that the School violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by failing to accommodate his disability. Braun, who has ADHD, had been receiving treatment for years and previously received testing accommodations from the School. At the time of the dispute, Braun was approximately six months away from completing his medical degree and beginning clinical training.
The dispute arose after the School implemented a new policy requiring students to enroll in a school-sponsored insurance plan. Braun had long been covered by Medicaid, which allowed him to maintain consistent care with his treating physician and access to prescribed medication. He requested a waiver from the new insurance requirement, supported by a letter from his physician explaining that any disruption in coverage would interrupt his treatment and could significantly impair his cognitive functioning, academic performance, and ability to complete the program.
Braun initially believed the School had approved his waiver request. However, in January 2026, the School placed an insurance hold on his account, preventing him from participating in required clinical rotations. Over the following weeks, Braun submitted additional documentation, sought reconsideration, and filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. Despite these efforts, the School denied his request and recommended him for dismissal, setting an administrative withdrawal date that would terminate his enrollment before he could complete his degree.
Braun filed suit and sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent his removal from the program and allow him to complete his clinical training while the case proceeded. The Court evaluated his request under the standard for injunctive relief, which requires a showing of likely success on the merits, irreparable harm, a balance of equities in the plaintiff’s favor, and that relief is in the public interest.
On the merits, the Court found that Braun had raised at least serious questions, and likely demonstrated a likelihood of success, on his ADA claim. The Court concluded that Braun sufficiently alleged he was a qualified individual with a disability, supported by medical documentation and the School’s prior recognition of his ADHD through earlier accommodations. The Court also found that the medical school qualified as a place of public accommodation subject to the ADA. With respect to the requested accommodation, the Court determined that Braun had plausibly shown that an insurance waiver was necessary to maintain uninterrupted access to essential treatment and medication for his disability, and that the request was reasonable given that the School had an existing waiver process and Braun had previously maintained his coverage without issue. The Court further concluded that allowing Braun to remain on his existing insurance would not fundamentally alter the nature of the program, as it would not affect academic standards, clinical requirements, or the School’s operations.
The Court also found that Braun would suffer irreparable harm absent relief. Without an injunction, Braun faced imminent administrative withdrawal, which would prevent him from completing his medical degree and could permanently impact his ability to pursue a medical career. The Court concluded that these harms could not be fully remedied through monetary damages.
Balancing the equities, the Court determined that the harm to Braun outweighed any potential burden on the school, particularly because the requested accommodation would maintain the status quo and would not alter academic or clinical requirements. The Court further found that the public interest favored enforcement of federal disability laws and ensuring equal access to educational programs.
Based on these findings, the Court granted the temporary restraining order, requiring the school to maintain Braun’s enrollment and allow him to continue participating in coursework and clinical rotations pending further proceedings.
Braun v. St. George Univ. Sch. of Med. (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2026) 2026 WL 496991.
Note: This case highlights that courts will closely scrutinize whether requested accommodations are necessary and reasonable, and that sweeping policy changes, even if applied uniformly, still require schools to consider accommodation requests on a case-by-case basis.