This week the U.S. House of Representatives is expected to pass legislation which would enact sweeping reform for the rights of the disabled. In a rare act of lame duck bipartisanship, senate Democrats and Republicans worked together on the bill, dubbed the "Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act." The bill would expand the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which was first signed into law by George H.W. Bush in 1990. Last week the new bill sailed through the Senate, and if passed in the House, the President is expected to follow in his father's footsteps by signing it into law.

As one who could benefit from such legislation, I've got to confess: This is thrilling news. I've got an invisible adversity called Crohn's disease, a serious digestive disease that not only causes severe inflammation in my gut, but extremely poor absorption of nutrients. Growing up, there were times when the disease caused ulcers in my mouth that were so large, that it was virtually impossible even to swallow water because it was like adding salt to a wound; the pain was unbearable. As a result, I spent months of my childhood hooked up to intravenous food, and have since been required to stick to a pretty basic, but specific diet-which my life currently depends on.

When I first set foot on campus in January 2006, the first place I called home was the International House. Its stated mission is said to "Foster intercultural respect, understanding, lifelong friendships and leadership skills for the promotion of a more tolerant and peaceful world." The idea of living with students from all walks of life seemed like a perfect fit. Naturally, I asked the staff at I-House to help me out with my dietary needs when I first moved in. I merely wanted to be provided with the perquisites to which every other resident living at I-House is given: access to food that they were able to physically tolerate, seven days per week. Dietary accommodation falls under Titles II & III of the ADA, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in all services, programs and activities provided to the public by state and local governments, and "places of public accommodation" (businesses and non-profit agencies that serve the public).

After 24 months and incessant requests to be reasonably accommodated, I-House refused to act. Not only did they refuse to help, they went to great lengths to flaunt their negligence. In a deliberate act of cruelty, the dining services manger responded to my plea stating, "Sorry Gideon, this is not a hospital."

After two years of negligence, I finally had enough. I filed a complaint with the state's Department of Fair Employment & Housing (DFEH), whose mission is to protect Californians from employment, housing and public accommodation discrimination. The DFEH took on my case, contacted their legal team and conducted a full-fledged investigation into the matter over the past nine months. Last week, they came out with their ruling.

It's been determined that I-House has in fact, violated my civil rights. State regulators arrived at International House last Friday, informing administrators that they are in violation of federal law. Now the case will move on to the conciliation process. The DFEH will make two more attempts to resolve the matter through this process. But if this fails, the district administrator may recommend litigation, which could ultimately move the case to civil court.

In the interim, I was forced to move out of I-House this past spring. My body simply could no longer bear the neglect. I spent far too many nights in the emergency room bowled over in pain from injurious food. Although I personally may not reap the benefits of these changes, my primary interest lies ensuring that every future resident in the similar predicament who requires dietary accommodation as per their health, will receive it-in a timely manner. I-House's resident handbook currently states that they "do not accommodate medical diets." First and foremost, this needs to be amended, and I-House needs to come into compliance with federal law. Over the years, Berkeley made a name for itself through its world-renowned disabled students program on campus. When it comes to accommodating students with disabilities, Berkeley ranks at the top, year after year. Interestingly enough, it was precisely this factor that convinced me to apply in the first place. Which is why the fact that this malice occurred-of all places-in Berkeley, California, has stunned many.

But perhaps what's utmost troubling, is the mere fact that the university bore witness to this vindictive negligence and remained entirely indifferent. Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel once said, "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." He feels that remaining silent when witness to an atrocity is just as bad-if not worse-than being the perpetrator. He was right. And it's for this sole reason that in addition to holding I-House accountable, I fully intend on holding the university equally accountable for their inaction, even after relentless pleas for intervention.

In an off-the-record conversation I had with a university official, he wondered why more students don't file grievances when clearly, there is an injustice at-hand and their civil rights are being violated. For one to take one glance at the neglect endured over the past three years while I lived at I-House and the lack of any accountability or enforcement on behalf of the University, I've got news for him: It's precisely this bureaucratic logjam which prevents students from receiving the accommodations to which they are entitled. After everything I had to go through simply to bring I-House into compliance and ameliorate their antiquated policies, it's no wonder most students shy away from seeking justice and demanding serious inquiry.

But with key legislation now pending in Washington D.C., the rights of the disabled will only be emboldened, reaching further than ever before in our nation's history. The government is sending a strong message and the university and I-House ought to take note: They're serious about enforcing the ADA and are prepared to act.