17 States Challenge Section 504: What This Means for Your DSP Training

The disability services landscape stands at a crossroads that could fundamentally reshape how Direct Support Professionals provide care. What began as a targeted challenge to specific healthcare regulations has evolved into a legal battle that threatens the very foundation of disability rights in America. For DSPs, supervisors, and training coordinators working in programs that receive federal funding, understanding this lawsuit isn't just academic—it's essential for ensuring continued compliance and protecting the individuals you serve.

What Is Texas v. Kennedy and Why Should DSPs Care?

Originally filed as Texas v. Becerra in September 2024, this lawsuit pits seventeen states against the federal government in a dispute that began over gender dysphoria protections but expanded to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The case was renamed Texas v. Kennedy following the change in federal administration, reflecting the new leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services.

The seventeen plaintiff states—Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia—initially asked federal courts to declare Section 504 entirely unconstitutional. While they have since backed away from this broadest challenge, they continue to contest key aspects of the 2024 regulatory updates that govern how federally funded programs must serve people with disabilities.

The Real-World Impact on DSP Training and Services

Section 504's reach extends far beyond healthcare settings, creating obligations that directly impact DSP training curriculum and service delivery models. The law requires that federally funded programs provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate to individual needs—a principle that has driven the shift from institutional care to community-based services over the past five decades.

The 2024 regulatory updates that sparked this lawsuit clarified several critical areas affecting DSP work. They strengthened requirements for accessible medical equipment, expanded website accessibility mandates, and reinforced the obligation to provide services in community settings rather than institutional environments. These updates also clarified that medical professionals cannot make treatment decisions based on disability biases—a protection that directly impacts how DSPs advocate for the individuals they support.

Training Implications Across Service Settings

The lawsuit's outcome could fundamentally alter DSP training requirements in multiple ways. Currently, Section 504 compliance necessitates comprehensive training on individual rights, non-discrimination principles, and accommodation strategies. Programs like communication skills for DSPs are built around these federal requirements, ensuring staff can effectively support individuals with diverse disability-related needs.

Educational settings face particular vulnerability, as Section 504 protects millions of students who don't qualify for special education services under IDEA but still require accommodations. School-based DSPs working with students who have ADHD, diabetes, anxiety disorders, or other conditions rely on Section 504 protections to ensure appropriate support services. The states bringing this lawsuit include Texas, which serves over 400,000 students under Section 504 plans—the highest number in the nation.

"If this happens, it would be a disaster for disabled people and everything from education to employment would be negatively impacted. Not only would it undermine 25 years of progress through Olmstead enforcement but it would also mean that Section 504 would not apply to entities that receive federal health care, education, housing or transportation funding."

Current Status and What's Changed

The legal landscape shifted significantly in April 2025 when the plaintiff states filed a joint status report clarifying their intentions. They explicitly stated they "have no intention to seek any relief from this Court on Count 3 (Section 504 is Unconstitutional)" and confirmed they would not seek to "prevent the Federal Government from allocating spending or applying the provisions of the Rehabilitation Act to any recipients of such funds."

This represents a significant retreat from their original position, which had asked courts to declare Section 504 unconstitutional in its entirety. However, the case remains active as states continue challenging specific aspects of the 2024 regulatory updates. The Department of Health and Human Services also issued clarifications stating that discussion of gender dysphoria in the regulation's preamble "does not have the force or effect of law and cannot be enforced."

Ongoing Challenges to Community Integration Requirements

While the constitutional threat has been withdrawn, states continue opposing requirements that federally funded programs provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate to individual needs. This challenge targets a fundamental principle established by the Supreme Court's 1999 Olmstead decision, which affirmed that unnecessary institutionalization constitutes discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504.

For DSPs, these integration requirements directly impact service delivery models and training focuses. Community-based services require different skill sets than institutional care, emphasizing community integration and inclusion strategies that help individuals participate fully in their communities while receiving necessary supports.

Preparing Your Organization for Uncertain Times

While the immediate constitutional threat to Section 504 has passed, disability service organizations must remain vigilant about potential changes to regulatory requirements. The case remains pending with no established briefing schedule, and the current administration's position on defending the 2024 regulations remains unclear.

Strengthening Your Training Program

Regardless of this lawsuit's ultimate outcome, maintaining high-quality DSP training remains essential for ensuring quality services and protecting individuals' rights. Organizations should focus on comprehensive programs that address not only federal compliance requirements but also evidence-based practices for supporting people with disabilities across all service settings.

Effective training programs must address the intersection of various federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and Section 504. This comprehensive approach ensures DSPs understand their roles within the broader disability rights framework while developing practical skills for day-to-day service provision.

Looking Ahead: Implications for the Field

The Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit represents more than a legal dispute over specific regulations—it reflects broader tensions about federal oversight of disability services and the role of civil rights protections in an era of changing political priorities. While the immediate threat to Section 504 has been withdrawn, the case highlights the ongoing need for vigilance in protecting disability rights.

Disability advocates express concern that even the narrower challenges to community integration requirements could set dangerous precedents for future attacks on disability rights laws. The legal theories underlying this lawsuit could potentially be applied to other civil rights protections, creating broader implications beyond the disability community.

For DSPs and the organizations that employ them, this lawsuit underscores the importance of understanding how federal civil rights laws shape service delivery expectations. The disability services field has evolved dramatically over the past fifty years, moving from institutional models toward community-based approaches that emphasize individual choice, inclusion, and self-determination. These advances rest on legal foundations that require continued protection and enforcement.

The path forward requires both vigilance and commitment to the principles that have driven progress in disability services. While Texas v. Kennedy has retreated from its broadest challenges, the case serves as a reminder that rights once gained can face renewed challenges. For DSPs committed to supporting individuals with disabilities, understanding these legal foundations—and their current vulnerabilities—remains essential for effective advocacy and service provision.

The disability community has shown remarkable resilience in responding to this challenge, mobilizing advocates across the country to defend Section 504 protections. This organized response demonstrates the continued importance of these civil rights laws in ensuring that people with disabilities can participate fully in their communities. As this case continues to evolve, the broader disability services field must remain engaged, informed, and committed to protecting the legal frameworks that enable quality, community-based support services.