Recognizing disability as a socially created category, a lived experience with real-world consequences, and part of a critical analytical framework, disability historians have illuminated core aspects of modern American history. With some frequency, however, both scholars and community members conflate disability with ableism. At other times, disability is presented as a category or identity separate from questions of power, privilege, and marginalization. It is common too that scholarly works focused on locating and defining ableism narrow or neglect historical context or specificity. In framing understandings of ableism around disability, many of us have largely ignored how ableism shape-shifts, how it is connected to other systems of power, or how the defining elements of ableism ebb and flow. This article calls on us to focus on the system of power itself—historicizing ableism. Making this move expands who we can write about, what sources we look at, and what purposes our historical work serves.

The Supreme Court issued its first decision on affirmative action in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978. Like most conflicts about civil rights in this era, the fight over affirmative action is presumed to involve primarily Black and White Americans. But Bakke cannot be understood without including Latino participants in the origin story. During the 1970s, Latinos’ rates of university enrollment increased more than those of any other group, especially in California, where the case originated. So when Bakke’s legal challenge threatened that access, Latino lawyers, students, and higher education advocates collaborated on a strategic defense of affirmative action. They drafted legal briefs, formed regional and national committees, and took to the streets. First in California and then in the East and Midwest, Latinos worked to shape the national discussion over the value of affirmative action and to protect their hard-won gains in higher education.

Current trends in suburban history incorporate questions about racial violence and exploitation formerly reserved for cities. They emphasize inequality but attribute its persistence to unequal terms of accessing suburbia rather than exclusion. Scholars should build on this insight to better historicize suburbs that do not fit existing frameworks. Specifically, they should bridge histories of climate change, capitalism, and gentrification. Doing so will ensure suburban history remains at the forefront for understanding present-day crises.