Section 504 Under Threat

If you have a child with a disability or you work in education, you’ve probably heard of Section 504.

A sister law to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ensures that students with disabilities and other health conditions get the accommodations they need to succeed in school through the development of “504 plans.” These plans support students with various disabilities and health conditions, including ADHD, anxiety, food allergies, and vision problems, who don’t qualify for an IEP but still need support to fully participate in school. 504 plans offer accommodations to help students with extra time on tests, special seating arrangements, and access to medical devices or assistive technologies.

Right now, Section 504 is at the center of a major legal battle that could dismantle the legal protections of millions of students.

The Lawsuit

Last fall, 17 states filed a lawsuit Texas v. Becerra against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The crux of the complaint is that the Biden Administration finalized a new rule in 2024 that included gender dysphoria under Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. While the discussion of gender dysphoria was in the preamble to the rule, the updated rule has no mention of gender dysphoria. The states filing the lawsuit—Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia—say their claim is just about federal overreach.

But the implications of this lawsuit are far-reaching and jeopardize 504 in its entirety. If the court limits what qualifies as a disability under Section 504, it could set a precedent that makes it harder for students to qualify for 504 plans. More alarmingly, this lawsuit asks the court to "declare Section 504 unconstitutional." The suit calls Section 504 “coercive, untethered to the federal interest in disability, and unfairly retroactive” and asks the court to “issue permanent injunctive relief against Defendants enjoining them from enforcing Section 504." If successful, this lawsuit would threaten the entire law, freeing states from legal obligations to provide students with aids, services, and protection from discrimination, and stripping away fundamental protections for students who depend on these accommodations to get an education.

The Students

504 plans serve children with a wide range of conditions including ADHD, asthma, diabetes, anxiety, dyslexia, and other physical and mental health impairments. It covers kids who may not need an Individualized Learning Program (IEP) plan and the specific learning supports provided under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, but still need some support to fully engage and succeed in school.

The Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education (at least for now) enforces Section 504 in public schools, and collects data on students with 504 plans through the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC). While the percentage of students on 504 plans is small compared to those with Individualized Education Plans (3.2 percent on 504s compared to 14 percent on IEPs), the use of 504 plans tripled from 2010 to 2021.

The percentage of students with 504 plans varies by state, mostly because of the different ways states define and collect student data. It’s worth noting that Texas, the state leading this lawsuit, has the highest percentage of students on 504 plans (last year, there were more than 400,000 kids on 504s in Texas).

The Future of 504

The case is underway and moving quickly, with February 25 as the deadline for legal briefs to be submitted by the states and the federal government. This may have begun as a dispute over one specific rule but it could end up threatening the future of Section 504, which has for more than 50 years helped millions of students with disabilities participate fully in school, free from discrimination. For parents and educators in the 17 plaintiff states, or any other states, this would be the time to start posing very specific questions to your state legislators and attorneys general about how they will ensure that children won’t lose basic civil rights protections.