Overview:
The joint status report filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, the states stated that they “have never moved — and do not plan to move — the court to declare or enjoin Section 504… as unconstitutional on its face.”
Disability advocates are raising alarms as a lawsuit brought by Texas and 16 other states challenges Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. This key federal law protects people with disabilities from discrimination in education, health care, housing, and other areas. The legal action, Texas v. Becerra, has sparked widespread concern over its potential implications, including threats to other civil rights protections.
The lawsuit was initially filed in response to the Biden administration’s 2023 update to Section 504 regulations, which expanded protections for people with disabilities. While the states’ lawsuit seeks explicitly to ensure that gender dysphoria is not classified as a disability under the law, the broad language of the filing appeared to argue for the complete invalidation of Section 504. This raised fears that a ruling favoring the states could strip millions of Americans of legal protections against discrimination.
However, amid growing national pressure, the attorneys general involved in the suit have attempted to clarify their position. In a joint status report filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, the states stated that they “have never moved — and do not plan to move — the court to declare or enjoin Section 504… as unconstitutional on its face.” Some officials, including South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, have even suggested that this clarification is a step toward winding down the lawsuit entirely.
Despite these reassurances, disability rights advocates remain skeptical.
“Watch out for the impact of the President’s Executive Order of 2/19 requiring review of all agency regulations that may exceed the requirements of the statutes, cause unnecessary costs, etc.,” said disability attorney Jose Martin. “If the review determines that the 504 regulations at 34 CFR Part 104 exceed the requirements of the non-discrimination provision, there goes child-find, evaluation, FAPE, 504 plans, periodic reviews, and procedural safeguards.
Legal experts warn that the latest filing reinforces some of the states’ most concerning arguments—particularly their claim that requiring services to be provided in the “most integrated setting” under the Olmstead v. L.C. decision is unconstitutional. If a court agrees, it could roll back decades of progress in disability rights, limiting access to federally funded programs in health care, education, transportation, and housing.
The case, which also involves states such as Georgia, Florida, Missouri, and Utah, remains paused for now, with another update expected in the coming weeks. Advocates continue to push for states to withdraw from the lawsuit entirely, warning that the outcome could have far-reaching consequences for civil rights protections nationwide.
