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

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

Yahoo12-03-2025

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
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

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Liberals And Conservatives Are Sharing The Political Views That Make Them Total Outsiders In Their Own Party, And Some Of The Responses Are Suuuuuper Unexpected
Liberals And Conservatives Are Sharing The Political Views That Make Them Total Outsiders In Their Own Party, And Some Of The Responses Are Suuuuuper Unexpected

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Liberals And Conservatives Are Sharing The Political Views That Make Them Total Outsiders In Their Own Party, And Some Of The Responses Are Suuuuuper Unexpected

Hi. My name is Michaela, and last year, during one of the most dramatic election years in US history, I started a series on the site called "BuzzFeed's Political Diaries," where I asked readers from all over the country who they were planning to vote for and what political issues mattered most to them. Over the course of a year, I received hundreds of fascinating political takes from people of different races, genders, age groups, and locations, and was able to show what voters were really thinking. Now, as our country seems to be more divided than ever under a second Trump administration, I'm asking BuzzFeeders to share a political opinion they hold that aligns more with the beliefs of the opposite party. I was inspired by this TikTok video and the comments people left that prove many political issues aren't black and white! Check it out for yourself! Here are the most interesting responses I received: 1."I can't believe I even have to say this. I've been a Republican for my entire life (I believe in a smaller government and less taxes), and I don't agree with MAGA at all. Especially not the part about absolutely ruining the LGBTQ+ community's lives." "I am a straight male, so I can't really offer perspective on what they're going through, but even I know that you can't treat people like second-class citizens. It makes me sad that a once great party turned into this." 2."I'm a Democrat and I believe anti-public 'camping' laws should be strictly enforced and offenders arrested. In other words, make all cities unfriendly to homeless people so we can take back our parks, sidewalks, recreation areas, and downtowns can be a jewel again." —Anonymous 3."I believe in transgender rights, gay marriage, and abortion. I'm a conservative, and one of the original beliefs of conservatism was 'limited government.'" "I do not care how you identify, who you love/marry, or what you do with your body. As long as it doesn't affect me, who am I to care what you do? The Right should adopt the same view: as long as something doesn't personally affect you or your daily life, why does it matter? Who gives a fuck what other people are doing if it doesn't affect you?"—Anonymous 4."As a Democrat, I think positively of the George H.W. Bush presidency. He signed the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, making it illegal to discriminate based on disability. As someone on the Autism Spectrum, I am thankful for it because I would not have the things I need to be successful in school and in life if it were not signed." —Anonymous Related: I'm Still Recovering From How Hard These 15 Women Made Me Laugh With Their Comedic Perfection This Week 5."I am a hardcore Republican all the way, but I strongly disagree with some of the pardons Donald Trump has done/alluded to (example, potentially pardoning Diddy)." —Anonymous 6."I'm a Democrat, and I believe that biological men don't belong in women's sports, and especially our locker rooms. They can have their own leagues/rooms. It's crazy to me that so many people, especially other women, are so eager to allow that to happen." "We women have worked too hard and come too far for men to take that from us. I'd obviously rather have a biological man in women's sports than women dying unnecessarily in childbirth. I think Republicans support women much less, of course, but neither party stands with biological women right now."—Anonymous 7."I'm a far left progressive who believes that Israel deserves and needs to exist, full stop." "I do believe in a two-state solution ultimately, but as a Jew, Israel is important to me as our historical homeland, and I find all the 'settler-colonialist' arguments against Israel on the left to be deeply historically ignorant, cruel, and offensive to the core. It is antisemitism to deny Jews alone the right to a state in their ancestral homeland, and no one will convince me otherwise."—Anonymous Related: 19 "Body Changes" That Clearly Indicate A Person Is Not Young Anymore, And I'm Not Ready For This Reality 8."I'm a Republican, and I disagree with what Trump is doing to this country, especially all the deportations of innocent people who have the legal right to be here!" —Anonymous 9."I'm an Independent who leans Democrat. I'm generally okay with people owning guns for a lot of reasons if they get proper training first. Ironically, I'm also fine with the Death Penalty existing." "I think it should be limited to mass-murderers, serial sex offenders (more specifically like serial rapists and/or serial pedophiles), and serial killers. This is mostly to prevent people with false convictions from getting killed by mistake."—Anonymous 10."As Democrats, we need to stop focusing on policing words. They're just words. I can think of maybe TWO slurs that should just never be used, but the rest? Honestly? Who fucking cares!?!" "We need to focus on equity, visibility, reintroducing the idea of community; if people know trans people personally, for example, they are far less likely to use a transphobic term. But if all you do is tell people 'don't do something' without anything but the ephemeral 'people get offended,' that's not only going to NOT prevent them from saying whatever it was, but will make them do it with more vigor because 'no one tells an AMERICAN what to say.' Creating and DEFENDING inclusive practices is what we need, not performative bullshit. And, seriously, people in general need to stop looking for reasons to be offended."—Anonymous 11."I am a Democrat, but really a moderate. I agree with a lot of the societal and cultural positions aligned with the Democratic Party. However, I do think that sometimes, you do have to steamroll and say screw bipartisanship." "The Republicans have always said screw bipartisanship when they really wanted to get something done and it's worked in their favor every time. When you have the larger number, sometimes it does make the most sense to use that to your advantage. I will probably never forgive the Biden administration for not adding more progressive judges to the Supreme Court to balance the scales."—Anonymous 12."As a Democrat, I firmly believe some of the policies that the Democrats fight for, like what Kamala ran on, are not popular with the public as much as they believe it is, and that's a big part of why we lost last year." "There are other factors too, but that's a big part. Biden's policies were unpopular, and her choices to align with those policies hurt her instead of benefiting, because the majority of people clearly didn't like what he was doing, and she was an extension."—Anonymous 13."I'm an independent, and I believe life for kids got worse once moms had to get a job. With or without a husband, being a mom is hard, constant work, and adding a full-time job to that is not family-friendly at all." —Anonymous 14."I'm a Democrat and I 100% believe that people convicted of despicable crimes should receive the death penalty." And finally... 15."The left needs to drop the moral argument from their campaign strategy. The popular vote said that more than half the country doesn't care if you're a convicted rapist that doesn't know the first line of the Constitution, you can still be president. So why do we keep arguing the point?" "Stick to policy, and for half the country, you'll have to write it on crayon, but show that democratic policies are better for everyday Americans. Show them how and why. Become the party of the working class, because there's a hell of a lot more of us than there are of them."—coollegend378 What are your thoughts? Share the political opinion that would make you the black sheep of your party in the comments below. Responses have been edited for length/clarity. Also in Goodful: 30 Absolutely Wild Medical Facts You've Probably Never Heard Of But Probably Should Hear Also in Goodful: 25 Life-Changing Habits People Added To Their Everyday Routines To Improve Their Lives For The Better Also in Goodful: "This Actually Isn't A Necessity": Millions Of People Watched A Mom Explain How Not Buying This Super Common Household Product Has Saved Her Family Thousands

Elon deletes Epstein tweet, sort of
Elon deletes Epstein tweet, sort of

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Elon deletes Epstein tweet, sort of

Elon Musk appears to be walking back one of his more explosive claims in an ongoing online feud with Donald Trump. On Saturday morning, Musk quietly deleted a post on X (formerly Twitter) in which he directly stated that Trump's name appears in the Jeffrey Epstein files. While that post is gone, several reposts remain up on Musk's account echoing the same allegation through the words of others. The now-deleted post capped off a dramatic week for Musk on the platform he owns. Earlier, he publicly slammed the 'Big Beautiful Bill Act,' calling it a betrayal of American taxpayers. The commentary sent ripples through conservative circles, with figures like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene admitting she hadn't even read the bill before voting in favor. By Thursday, Musk escalated his attacks, targeting Trump directly by resurfacing the former president's old tweets and pointing out contradictions in his current positions. What began as criticism of a piece of legislation quickly turned into a personal, highly visible spat between two of the most influential figures in Republican politics. The Epstein reference marked the lowest point in the exchange until Musk backtracked by deleting it. Still, the damage may be done, as there are many screenshots still circulating online. On Friday, Musk launched a poll asking users if they wanted a new political party aimed at the less extreme majority, and then spent the day proposing this new party for the American people – the 'American Party.' As of Saturday morning, Musk has yet to post again. Whether this is a cooldown or a calm before the next storm remains to be seen.

Is Musk Starting a New Political Party Amid Trump Feud?
Is Musk Starting a New Political Party Amid Trump Feud?

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Is Musk Starting a New Political Party Amid Trump Feud?

Elon Musk speaks during a Town Hall event at the KI Convention Center in Green Bay, Wisconsin, on March 30, 2025. Credit - Joshua Lott—The Washington Post In an escalation of Elon Musk's fractured relationship with President Donald Trump and his Republican allies, the Tesla CEO has floated the idea of starting a new political party to rival the two-party system. Musk conducted a poll via his social media platform X (formerly Twitter), asking his 220 million followers: 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' The public results show that around 80% of respondents voted yes. 'The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle!' Musk said, reacting to the results of his Thursday, June 5, poll. 'And exactly 80% of people agree…This is Fate.' On Friday, Musk shared a potential name: "The America Party." The moniker echoes that of his super political action committee (PAC), America PAC, which was founded in 2024 to support Trump's efforts to return to the White House. The super PAC reportedly spent around $200 million to help elect Trump. Musk's donations made him Trump's largest, and most prominent, donor in the 2024 election. Read More: 5 Things To Watch As the Trump-Musk Meltdown Proceeds In 2016 and 2020, Musk voted for Trump's Democratic opponents—Hillary Clinton and former President Joe Biden, respectively. But during the 2022 midterm elections, Musk said he intended to vote Republican, and that later developed into him becoming Trump's close ally, which was cemented when the President positioned him as lead of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a role he held until recently. However, Trump and Musk have now had an explosive fall-out, which has played out in the public arena via social media over the past few days. It started with Musk's disapproval over Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' which he called an "abomination" and told his social media followers to 'call your Senator, call your Congressman… kill the bill.' On Thursday, the back-and-forth between the two influential men escalated, with Musk alleging that Trump is listed in the files related to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk said. He did not provide evidence pertaining to this and, as of early Saturday morning, the post has been deleted. Musk also, in another since-deleted X post, endorsed a message that said: "Trump should be impeached" and that Vance "should replace him." Trump has argued on his own social media platform, Truth Social, that "Elon was wearing thin" and that he asked the Tesla CEO to leave the White House. Read More: Musk's Major Allegation Against Trump Disappears From Social Media: 'That Post Has Been Deleted' Meanwhile, when talking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday night, Trump said he didn't have any plans to speak with Musk. But some lawmakers are convinced that the feud between Trump and Musk will soon thaw, and that the latter's idea for a new political party won't come to fruition. On Friday, Republican Rep. Jimmy Patronis of Florida told NewsNation's Blake Burman: 'Elon Musk is not gonna create a new political party... Trump knows that sometimes you're going to have [a] falling out with those that you trust, you like, that you're friends with. It happens with us in D.C. all the time. Mark my words, about a month from now, these guys will be hanging around again.' Contact us at letters@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store