
Will a Texas-led legal fight over gender dysphoria threaten disabled student protections?
At her college in Pennsylvania and as a child growing up in New Jersey, she has used screen-reading technology that turns written documents or books into audio recordings and hardcover braille texts. To compensate for the longer time it takes to listen to passages being read aloud or in braille, she's been given extended time on exams.
These accommodations – given to her through a federal disability protections law – have allowed her to attend and thrive in traditional classes with students who don't have a disability, she said.
"Without a screen reader and braille, I would not be able to an have equitable education," Brendle said. "Braille is the ultimate equalizer. It has allowed me to learn literacy and keep up with my peers."
Now, upwards of one million students with disabilities like Brendle who receive assistance in schools could be affected by a legal challenge to that same law − Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Known as 504 plans, the popular system for accommodating students in school are geared for kids who do qualify for help under disability plans known as IEPs, or Individualized Education Programs.
The more than 50-year-old law requires federally funded schools to offer learning plans and accommodations to students with disabilities. The law also mandates protections from discrimination for Americans with disabilities in federally funded workplaces, hospitals and other agencies.
In Sept. 2024, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed Texas v. Becerra, leading a coalition of 17 Republican state attorneys general against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services after the Biden administration's Office of Civil Rights finalized a new rule under Section 504 last year.
They've argued in their lawsuit that Section 504 is "unconstitutional" as it stands and they want to see the law re-evaluated in federal court and the repeal of key changes in the new regulations, which include protections for people who experience gender dysphoria and a clarified requirement for states to provide accommodations for people with disabilities in "the most integrated setting
The most integrated settings in schools under Section 504 are often traditional classrooms with students who don't have disabilities. The alternative is an "institutionalized," or isolated setting, which could be a classroom or school away from their peers.
In a recent joint status report, the Republican state attorneys general, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and its Sec. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. clarified they don't want to see the law entirely overturned or declared unconstitutional "on its face" – but they are concerned about the way the law is enforced.
Despite the new development in the case, some disability experts say the lawsuit poses a serious threat to the federal disabilities law and the outcome of the case could still lead to the law getting overturned.
Shira Wakschlag, a senior director of legal advocacy and general counsel of a national nonprofit organization that serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities called The Arc, says the lawsuit is "still very much alive" because it has not been amended or withdrawn. The original lawsuit stating Section 504 is "unconstitutional" is what's before the judge in the case – sparking worry, she said.
Brendle worries most about the idea of students with disabilities being separated from their peers in traditional classrooms.
"The 17 states said they'd never wanted to make all of 504 unconstitutional – even though that was written in their complaint," Brendle. "They also said that the only aspects they want to repeal have to do with integration and protecting people from being placed in institutions. No disabled person should be forced to live in an 'institution.'"
Iowa joins suit over: Biden gender dysphoria rule, alarming parents with disabled children
Section 504 is a federal law that protects people with disabilities from discrimination in federally funded institutions, including schools. About 1.6 million students with disabilities were served under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act during the 2020-21 school year, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Education.
Public schools and some private schools receive funding from the U.S. Department of Education to support students with disabilities. These students are guaranteed the right to a "free, appropriate public education" through the Individuals with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act broadens those protections.
The law guarantees a 504 plan for kids who need one at federally funded schools. The accommodation plans are for students with a wide range of disabilities who need specific tools and help to learn equally to their peers in integrated classrooms, said Daniel Van Sant, director of disability policy for the Harkin Institute for Public Policy & Citizen Engagement. Those tools can include noise-cancelling headphones for students to stay focused, a desk at the height of a wheelchair or a medical plan for a student who has an allergic reaction.
One of the disabilities protected by Section 504 is attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD.
Kids with ADHD make up a large portion of those with 504 accommodation plans, which are needed to help them focus and complete schoolwork in an integrated classroom setting, said Jeffrey Katz, a clinical psychologist and co-chair of the public policy committee for the organization Children and Adults with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, or CHADD.
"Most kids with ADHD need help with organization, management plans that help them with talking out or modifying their work because kids with ADHD have trouble persisting with effort," he said. "All of these things can be done in a classroom."
The legal requirement also forces teachers to follow student-specific plans to help them thrive in their classes and prevents students with disabilities from being segregated from their peers without disabilities, Katz said.
The state attorneys general object to the addition of gender dysphoria to the list of student disabilities protected under Section 504. Gender dysphoria is the distress a person can feel when their gender identity doesn't match their sex assigned at birth. (LGBTQ+ rights advocates have long said gender dysphoria is a recognized medical condition that should be considered a disability under Section 504.)
The states also oppose a part of the new rule that clarifies a long-standing stipulation of the rule that states must provide services for people with disabilities in the most integrated settings possible. In schools, that would mean kids with disabilities are required under the law to be served in traditional classrooms with students without disabilities.
More broadly, they argue HHS under the Biden administration violated the Administrative Procedures Act and the Constitution's Spending Clause by placing new requirements on federal grants for people with disabilities, including students.
The original lawsuit also states they want a judge to evaluate whether Section 504 as it stands and the regulation of the law is constitutional.
Following the outcry from disability rights advocates and parents of students with disabilities, the coalition of state attorneys general have clarified in a court document they do not want to see the law removed in part or as a whole, but that the regulations of the law as it stands are too restrictive on states and unconstitutional as applied.
On Feb. 19, the plaintiffs filed the joint status report in the U.S. District Court in Texas after President Donald Trump in January signed an executive order stating that agencies shall not 'promote or otherwise inculcate gender ideology," including gender dysphoria. They said in the court document that they are evaluating their position in the lawsuit based on this move.
The state attorneys general suing include those from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.
But the potential axing of protections for some people experiencing gender dysphoria under the law doesn't cover all of the states' worries.
Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach has said he joined the lawsuit because of the added inclusion of gender dysphoria under Section 504. On the other hand, Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor has said he's concerned that the "integrated setting" requirement will increase costs on states and burdens Medicaid providers.
"From Alaska's perspective, the gender dysphoria is a very small piece of the lawsuit," said Patty Sullivan, a spokesperson from the Alaska Department of Law, in an email to USA TODAY. "Our concerns have been and continue to be on the adverse impacts this rule will have on the provision of services to people with severe disabilities and on state programs."
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge James Wesley Hendrix is currently assigned to the case.
Paxton's office and several of the other state attorneys general named in the complaint did not respond to inquiries about the lawsuit from USA TODAY. Sullivan, the spokesperson for the Alaska Department of Law, pointed to an op-ed written by Alaska State Attorney General Treg Taylor for The Alaska Beacon.
In the article, Taylor said the changes made to Section 504 have jeopardized "the continued viability of state programs and services and are impossible for any state to fully comply with."
"In fact, the new regulation is likely to undermine the State's ability to provide ongoing service and supports,' Taylor wrote. "It requires states to redesign their service delivery systems to conform to newly imagined and vaguely defined requirements, regardless of the cost or impact to the state."
Does Project 2025 eliminate IEPs? Not explicitly, but experts are wary
Despite her vision impairment, Brendle has been able to succeed academically and socially in her schooling career – at least up until this point.
But she worries she and other college students will not continue to prosper in schools and whether it will be more difficult to secure jobs if Section 504 is removed from federal law.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, another disabilities protections law, mandates student learning adjustments on learning assessments and goals.
But Section 504 goes further to specify that people with disabilities must be given the tools to be thrive in integrated settings in federally-funded schools, workplaces and other agencies and organizations, said Carrie Gillispie, a senior policy analyst with the education policy program at national nonpartisan think tank New America.
Brendle said she's heard of many people abundantly qualified for their job but denied that job just on the basis of a disability. She fears that reality could worsen.
"This will touch millions of disabled children in some capacity," Brendle said.
Contact Kayla Jimenez at kjimenez@usatoday.com. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: States sue over 504 plan law protecting disabled students: What to know
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows States Considering Redrawing Congressional Maps
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A redistricting battle sparked by Texas Republicans' efforts to redraw the state's congressional maps, supported by President Donald Trump, is spreading to other states and could reshape the 2026 midterms. Why It Matters Democrats and Republicans in Texas are in an escalating fight over the GOP's efforts to redraw Texas' congressional map to gain five seats in the U.S. House of Representatives as the midterms loom. Redistricting is the process by which states redraw or redefine legislative district boundaries on the federal, state and local jurisdiction levels. Typically, redistricting happens once every 10 years following the census to adjust boundaries based on population changes. Mid-decade redistricting does happen from time to time, however, usually following legal challenges against maps accused of being gerrymandered, or amended in the interests of one side over another to create "safe" electoral seats. Empty chairs belonging to House Democrats remain empty during a session convocation in the State Capitol on August 5, 2025, in Austin, Texas. Empty chairs belonging to House Democrats remain empty during a session convocation in the State Capitol on August 5, 2025, in Austin, Texas. Rodolfo Gonzalez)/AP What To Know The bid by Texas Republicans to redraw the congressional map prompted Democrats in the legislature to leave the state in a bid to deny the legislature a quorum and halt what they see as an illegal bid to win more seats. Texas GOP lawmakers unveiled the first draft of a new congressional map last week. Republicans hold 25 of 38 seats, and the new map could bring their total districts won in 2026 to 30 if passed. Under the new map, Texas's four Democratic-leaning major metropolitan areas—Austin, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio—would be divided among at least four congressional districts each. Nearly all of these districts would have a Republican majority, according to The Associated Press. Democrats have argued that if Republicans succeed in redrawing districts in Texas, Trump will push other states to do the same, leading Democratic leaders there to warn that they will have no choice but to adopt the same tactic as their party colleagues in the Lone Star State. California and New York politicians have pledged to fight back by redrawing their own congressional maps to gain more Democratic seats in the U.S. House. On Monday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul said "we are at war" as she was joined by Texas Democrats who left their state to prevent Republican Governor Greg Abbott's attempts to redraw the U.S. House map. Elsewhere, Ohio Republicans are preparing to redraw their congressional lines this fall, with the potential to target up to three Democratic-held seats. In Missouri, the GOP is eyeing a 7-1 map that would eliminate the Kansas City-based district of Democrat Emanuel Cleaver II. In all, nine states, including Texas, New York and California, have said they are considering redrawing their maps, according to officials in those states and media reports. What People Are Saying President Donald Trump, referring to the 2024 presidential election, told CNBC on Tuesday: "I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats." New York Governor Kathy Hochul, at a Monday press conference, said: "If Republicans are willing to rewrite these rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us no choice; we must do the same." What Happens Next Legal experts anticipate that any aggressive redistricting moves could prompt court challenges. Historically, lawsuits delayed or overturned redistricting plans when courts deemed them unconstitutional or in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

2 hours ago
Why dozens of Democrats left Texas and how Republicans are trying to punish them
AUSTIN, Texas -- A walkout by Texas House Democrats is stalling redrawn political maps that President Donald Trump wants before the 2026 elections to bolster Republican chances of keeping its U.S. House majority. Since leaving the state on Aug. 3 to block a vote in the Texas Capitol, dozens of Democrats have scattered to Chicago, New York and Boston and faced escalating threats from Republicans who have signed civil arrest warrants and mobilized state troopers. Trump said Tuesday the FBI 'may have to" help to bring back Texas Democrats, who have not said how long they are prepared to hold out. But they've signaled no intention of quickly returning home. Here are some things to know: Trump wants to redraw the Texas congressional map in hopes of adding five more GOP seats in Texas in the midterm elections to boost his party's chance of preserving its slim U.S. House majority. Republicans currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats. As the minority party in the state House and Senate, Democrats simply do not have the votes to stop the plan under normal legislative procedures. The maps were passed by a committee last week and swiftly scheduled for a floor vote. Sizing up their limited power and options, Democrats chose to deny the quorum as their only chance to put the brakes on Trump's plan and to rally national support. Many went to Illinois and New York. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has welcomed Democrats in Chicago. Pritzker, a potential 2028 presidential contender who has been one of Trump's most outspoken critics during the president's second term, had been in quiet talks with Texas Democrats for weeks about offering support if they chose to leave the state. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, who has hosted Texas Democrats in Albany, said the fight over congressional lines in Texas has implications nationally. Meanwhile, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said his state would move forward with partisan redistricting if Texas proceeds. California Democrats are considering redrawing the state's congressional map to carve out five districts and give the party 48 out of its 52 seats. The governor said he would do this by calling a November special election to get approval from voters to circumvent the state's independent commission responsible for redistricting. Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has asked the state Supreme Court, which is entirely controlled by GOP justices, to remove the Democratic House leader from office through an untested legal argument that the absent legislators have effectively forfeited their seats. Democrats blasted the lawsuit and the court has not ruled. A lawmaker refusing to show up is a civil violation of legislative rules, and they can be fined $500 for every day they aren't at the Capitol. In 2021, the Texas Supreme Court held that House leaders had the authority to 'physically compel the attendance' of missing members but no Democrats were forcibly brought back to the state after warrants were served that year in a similar quorum break. Texas Democrats have fled the state before in attempts to thwart the Republican majority. They twice denied the GOP a quorum in 2003 to stop Republican efforts to redraw voting maps, at one point leaving for Oklahoma and later for New Mexico. In 2021, Democrats left the state in the final days of the session over an elections bill and new voting restrictions. They stayed away for 38 days. Both efforts only delayed the Republican-led measures that were ultimately passed once Democrats eventually returned to Austin. And while the current special session ends Aug. 20, Abbott has the authority to keep calling lawmakers back to the Capitol for 30-day special sessions to pass the redistricting bill and any other item he believes should be addressed. The current special session agenda includes help for communities devastated by the the July Fourth floods that killed at least 136 people. As part of their walkout, Texas Democrats have accused Republicans of prioritizing the politics of redistricting over flood victims. Abbott has defended the redistricting plan as an effort to redraw lines to better reflect voters who supported Trump in the 2024 election, when he easily won Texas. He said there was nothing illegal about drawing lines on the basis of political makeup.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump knocks Taylor Swift in post supporting Sydney Sweeney, American Eagle jeans ad
President Donald Trump revived his criticism of one of the world's biggest pop stars: Taylor Swift. Trump posted on Truth Social on Aug. 4 in support of Sydney Sweeney, who has been at the center of a debate around an American Eagle ad campaign she appears in. The ad features Sweeney in all denim, and plays on words implying she has good "jeans" and "genes," which some have argued has an undertone of eugenics. During the debate around the ads, reports surfaced that Sweeney is a registered Republican in Florida, and Trump quickly took her side when talking to reporters on Aug. 3, saying "Oh, now I love her ad ... If Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic." In the subsequent winding post about the American Eagle ad, a Jaguar ad and the Bud Light boycott, he took aim at Swift. "Just look at Woke singer Taylor Swift," the post read. "Ever since I alerted the world as to what she was by saying on TRUTH that I can't stand her (HATE!). She was booed out of the Super Bowl and became, NO LONGER HOT. The tide has seriously turned — Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be." USA TODAY reached out to a representative for Swift. More: American Eagle stock rises after Trump praises Sydney Sweeney ad amid backlash Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris in the 2024 election Swift endorsed the Democratic nominee after the presidential debate between former Vice President Kamala Harris and Trump. Harris had a historically short campaign after stepping in for former President Joe Biden following his disastrous debate with Trump earlier in the summer. "(Harris) fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them," Swift said in a post, which took a subtle jab at JD Vance's viral comments about "childless cat ladies." "I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos." Days later, Trump took to Truth Social to declare "I hate Taylor Swift," though his campaign leaned into the clash by selling T-shirts with a similar design to the Taylor Swift Eras Tour merchandise, only with Trump's face on it. Trump also claimed in May that "she's no longer HOT" since he said he hated her. Trump has threatened legal action on Harris' celebrity endorsements Trump has said he wants a major investigation into celebrity endorsements of former Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential election. On May 19, Trump questioned whether Harris paid Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé and Oprah, a few of the big names who stumped for Harris in her presidential campaign. "This was a very expensive and desperate effort to artificially build up her sparse crowds," Trump said on Truth Social. "IT'S NOT LEGAL! For these unpatriotic 'entertainers,' this was just a CORRUPT & UNLAWFUL way to capitalize on a broken system." He did not mention Swift, but left accusations open-ended in a separate post by saying "perhaps many others." But the claims come without evidence, as the Federal Election Commission does not explicitly ban paid endorsements. Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump revives 'hate' for Taylor Swift, praises Sydney Sweeney jeans ad