An ongoing legal battle in the US District Court of Northern Texas could reshape the lives of millions of disabled Americans. The case, Texas v. Becerra, challenges the constitutionality of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which protects people from discrimination based on disability. At its core, the lawsuit is an attack on the Biden administration’s effort to update federal rules by — among other things — including gender dysphoria as a potentially qualifying disability. But the complaint also questions the legality of other protections that disabled people have relied on for generations.
As of February 20, some of the attorneys general involved with the case have stated they do not wish to eliminate all Section 504 protections, and the court has paused its work on the case for the time being. Even so, the complaint has not been officially amended or withdrawn, so many in the disability rights community say these protections are still at risk.
Texas v. Becerra is not just a legal battle over state autonomy or gender dysphoria; it is a fight for the future of civil rights in America. The outcome of this case could determine whether millions of young people have access to education, health care, and housing or are left to fend for themselves in a system that no longer recognizes their rights.
The case: A timeline and what’s at stake
The Biden administration sought to modernize protections for individuals with disabilities, requiring health care providers to use accessible medical equipment and ensure websites and apps are accessible to those with mental or physical impairments. The updated rules also reiterated a long-standing principle of providing accommodations to disabled people in the least restrictive way, enabling them to be as integrated into the “mainstream” setting as possible. In schools, for instance, this would mean providing accommodations for a student so they can remain in classes with their peers rather than being secluded in separate spaces.
In its introductory discussion to the updated 504 rules, the Biden administration also noted gender dysphoria, a condition recognized by medical professionals as distress experienced due to a mismatch between assigned and experienced gender identity, and pointed out that it may be considered a disability, a view shared by the Fourth Circuit Appeals Court. The Biden administration’s 504 update was intended to ensure that anyone struggling with gender dysphoria could access schools, health care, and other federally funded programs without facing discrimination.
The lawsuit, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, targeted this aspect in particular while also challenging the constitutionality of the entirety of Section 504, claiming that the federal government overstepped its authority by imposing antidiscrimination requirements on states. If successful, the case could dismantle decades of progress for disability rights, leaving millions without protection from discrimination and at risk of wholesale exclusion from society.
In February, 17 states joined Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), to file what is known as a joint status report, where they pointed to President Trump’s recent executive order on gender as a potential source of resolution. In other words, given the Trump administration’s posture against the trans community, these states are no longer worried about losing federal funding if they engage in discrimination.
In the report, the states also claimed that they do not object to Section 504 protections, but maintained the application of those rules beyond the scope of the Rehabilitation Act is unconstitutional. In subsequent public statements, though, some attorneys general have claimed they have no intention of eliminating Section 504 protections, and that their grievance is instead limited to the Biden administration’s inclusion of gender dysphoria, which they seem to associate in an overtly simplified manner with the trans community.
But Mia Ives-Rublee, senior director of the Disability Justice Initiative at the Center for American Progress, tells Teen Vogue that hard-won rights are still very much under threat. According to Ives-Rublee, Section 504 has faced opposition since its inception, and conservative politicians are “using trans individuals as a cudgel to cut off 504.” It’s only now, she says, amid the pushback by families in response to the lawsuit, that some are trying to distance themselves from its claims.
The court is expecting plaintiffs to file another status report in April.
The legacy of the the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was a landmark achievement for disability rights. Section 504 of the law prohibits discrimination against or exclusion of disabled individuals in programs that receive federal funding. It was the first federal law to guarantee equal access for disabled people, though it was not implemented for years due to political and bureaucratic inertia. In 1977, activists staged protests and sit-ins around the country to raise awareness and to pressure the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HHS’s predecessor agency) to publish the implementing regulations.
Ultimately, the implementation of Section 504 set a precedent for antidiscrimination protections and paved the way for the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), which was passed in 1990. The ADA expanded protections for disabled people to include employment, public services, and private businesses. Multiple generations have since moved through childhood, schooling, and adulthood with ADA and 504 protections — but Texas v. Becerra stands to disrupt how they’ve come to expect society to operate for children and adults with disabilities.
Potential impacts of the case
If Section 504 is gutted, the consequences for students would be devastating. Students rely on 504 plans in schools for accommodations like extended test time, assistive technology, and access to medical care during school hours. Without these protections, schools could legally deny accommodations, leaving disabled students at a severe disadvantage.
Children and young people within the child welfare and foster care systems comprise an often overlooked population that depends on protections granted by Section 504. Eliminating Section 504 could make it harder for them to access education, stable housing placement, and health care. Many children in the foster care system qualify for 504 protections due to trauma, mental health conditions, or other disabilities, and without these protections, schools and foster homes could deny them necessary accommodations.
The quality of care across US states is already inconsistent, and without federal oversight, disparities could worsen. Says Ives-Rublee, foster youth with disabilities already tend to be placed in congregate care, like group homes and institutions, rather than family settings. Gutting 504 protections could increase the institutionalization of disabled youth and deepen the foster care-to-prison pipeline.
Rebecca Louve Yao, CEO of the National Foster Youth Initiative, tells Teen Vogue via email that experts estimate 35-60% of youth in foster care have at least one disability, and that without federal protections, youth with disabilities will have fewer housing options. This could lead to higher rates of institutionalization, homelessness, and students being driven out of school.
According to Shira Wakschlag, senior director of legal advocacy and general counsel at The Arc, an organization that advocates for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, removing Section 504 protections would have a domino effect on the lives of disabled individuals, impacting every aspect of their ability to participate in society. Without these protections, programs receiving federal funding — such as schools, hospitals, and community-based service providers — could legally deny accommodations, making it harder for disabled people to access health care, education, and employment.
For example, if someone cannot get accessible health care due to the lack of Section 504 safeguards, they may then be unable to attend school or work. Similarly, the loss of protections for home and community-based services would devastate the ability of disabled individuals to live independently and pursue their goals. The loss of Section 504 would not only isolate disabled individuals, it would also erode a broader framework of inclusion and equality that these protections help sustain.
At the same time that the Texas v. Becerra lawsuit threatens to dismantle Section 504, disabled individuals are facing a full-scale attack on their other rights and support systems. Proposed cuts to Medicaid, a critical resource for funding disability care and community-based services, could jeopardize the ability of disabled people to live independently and access essential health care. Additionally, the dismantling of the Department of Education threatens the resources and protections that ensure students with disabilities have equal access to education.
These simultaneous challenges highlight a broader assault on the rights of disabled people and the systems that enable their inclusion and independence. Viewing these threats in context, they collectively undermine the progress made toward equality and accessibility for the disability community.
The bigger picture: Attacks on civil and human rights
Texas v. Becerra is part of a broader assault on civil rights, particularly for marginalized communities. From executive orders targeting the transgender community to lawsuits challenging federal antidiscrimination rules to the dismantling of federal agencies that investigate civil rights complaints, conservative politicians are waging a full-on war against progress. Even when bills or lawsuits fail, these efforts have a chilling effect and create an environment of fear and uncertainty.
Erin Reed, a writer and independent journalist who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, says inflammatory rhetoric about transgender people, such as statements from the Texas attorney general’s office framing transgender rights as an ideology, has a profound and damaging impact on young trans individuals. For young people struggling with gender dysphoria or questioning their identity, this kind of messaging sends a clear and harmful message: that their existence is not valued or protected by the state.
In Texas and other states where laws and policies actively target trans individuals — such as bathroom bans and bills that criminalize transgender identity — the fear and stigma are amplified. Young trans people may feel unsafe in schools, public spaces, and even their own communities. The emotional toll is compounded by the very real threat of discrimination, harassment, and violence. By dehumanizing trans people through terms like “transgenderism,” conservative politicians suggest their attacks are targeting an ideology rather than individuals, but the effects can be deeply personal and devastating.
Solidarity as resistance
Sarah Warbelow, vice president of legal at the Human Rights Campaign says, “It is important that folks, whether they are part of the disability community, part of the LGBTQ community, or simply allies of those communities, make their voices heard, advocate with their members of Congress, weigh in with the White House to explain how important section 504 is to people's lives and for the whole range of conditions that individuals may have. We have seen even this current administration reverse course when there has been public outcry, and people still do have significant power when they band together to make their voices heard.”
Attacks on trans rights are often a precursor to broader rollbacks of civil rights protections for disabled people, women, and other marginalized communities. In this context, solidarity is more important than ever. By standing together, these communities can resist efforts to dismantle their rights and ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live with dignity and equality.
Ives-Rublee from the Center for American Progress notes that she has already seen a bit of a split in the community based on the definition of disability and “that it is going to be more important than ever that we back each other up and not fight for scraps.”
Stay up-to-date with the politics team. Sign up for the Teen Vogue Take
