United States: Section 504 under threat?

Sarah Tuberty

BECERRA vs Texas

Two major landmark laws protect persons with disabilities in the United States. The first is section 504 of the Rehabilitation act of 1973. This is the landmark civil rights law, preventing discrimination for the Disability Community. Section 504 is connected to federal funds and notably protects school services for disabled students in institutions that receive federal funds. Section 504, while pivotal, was not all encompassing, and therefore the Americans with Disability’s Act passed in 1990 was much more broadly comprehensive – protecting rights for employment and programs and services outside of programs that received federal funds.

In both section 504 and the ADA, there are specific definitions for what counts as a “Disability.” The Americans with Disabilities Act defines “disability” as an individual with (1) “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;” (2) “a record of such an impairment;” or (3) “being regarded as having such an impairment.”

In 2001, Ella Williams sued her employer, Toyota Manufacturing, Kentucky, INC over her job not providing reasonable accommodations for her carpal tunnel syndrome. The case argued whether carpal tunnel syndrome fit the definition of disability. The Supreme Court unanimously decided that "Given large potential differences in the severity and duration of the effects of carpal tunnel syndrome, an individual's carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis, on its own, does not indicate whether the individual has a disability within the meaning of the ADA," - Justice O'Connor for the Court.

The case today progresses further on these definitions of what is and what is not a Disability. Under the Biden administration, the HHS put out a 2 page summary with the OASH on Gender-Affirming Care and Young People, and an HHS Notice and Guidance on Gender Affirming Care, Civil Rights, and Patient Privacy which suggested that gender dysmorphia could be considered a disability that was therefore protected by section 504. Those states that do not abide by these protections are at risk for loosing deferral funding.

Today, the State of Texas, along with 15 other US States, Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia – are suing Mr. Becerra in his official capacity. Their argument is that transgender, and gender dysmorphia were explicitly left out of Section 504 as it was initially written and that it is unlawful to include them at this time.

This lawsuit goes on to demand the following:

"Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court:

a. Issue permanent injunctive relief against Defendants enjoining them from enforcing

the Final Rule;

b. Declare that the Final Rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act;

c. Hold unlawful and set aside (i.e., vacate) the Final Rule;

d. Declare Section 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794, unconstitutional;

e. Issue permanent injunctive relief against Defendants enjoining them from enforcing

Section 504;

f. Award attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in this action to Plaintiffs;

g. Issue any and all other relief to Plaintiffs the Court deems just and proper."

Namely- the most important one here I think is section D: which, as I was doing my reading, I think this is section 504- are they in an attempt to try and overthrow it by attempting to deem it as unconstitutional? How have you come to understand the implications of this court case? What precedent does this set? How has Disability policy played out in your communities? What are your thoughts and understandings on all of this??

Resources:

Texas vs Becerra

Williams vs Toyota Manufacturing Kentucky, INC

504, 29 U.S.C. § 794