Will a Texas-led legal fight over gender dysphoria threaten disabled student protections?

USA Today

12-03-2025

Will a Texas-led legal fight over gender dysphoria threaten disabled student protections?
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Cracker Barrel accused of refusing to serve special needs students
11 special education students and seven staff members from Maryland's Charles County Public Schools were refused service at a Waldorf Cracker Barrel during a community-based instruction outing.
unbranded - Newsworthy
Villanova University student Kaleigh Brendle has had low vision her entire young life.
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
What is Section 504? How could a child be affected?
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.
What does the lawsuit say?
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
Inside and beyond the classroom: 'This will touch millions of disabled children'
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 [e-mail]. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.