A legal battle involving 17 U.S. states, including West Virginia, has sparked intense debate over the rights of people with disabilities and the potential consequences of a lawsuit that could undermine decades of legal protections. The lawsuit, Texas v. Becerra, challenges the Biden Administration’s addition of “gender dysphoria” as a protected condition under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. While the focus of the lawsuit is on this specific language, disability rights advocates fear that the case could result in the entire statute being struck down—potentially stripping millions of Americans of their legal protections in education, employment, and healthcare.
What is Section 504?
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a landmark civil rights law that guarantees individuals with disabilities the right to access education, employment, and other federally funded programs without discrimination. It serves as the foundation for all modern disability rights laws in the United States, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Disability advocates widely regard Section 504 as essential in ensuring that people with disabilities receive the accommodations and protections they need to live independently and with dignity. It has played a key role in establishing equal access to schools, workplaces, transportation, and public spaces.
The Lawsuit: Texas v. Becerra
The controversy began when the Biden Administration added language to Section 504 clarifying that “gender dysphoria” should be considered a disability and therefore protected under the act. The addition triggered backlash from conservative lawmakers, who argue that the change is an overreach and that gender dysphoria should not be classified as a disability.
The 17 states involved in the lawsuit, including West Virginia, have taken an aggressive stance against the amendment, claiming that the inclusion of gender dysphoria invalidates the entire statute. Their legal argument challenges the constitutionality of Section 504 itself, raising alarm among disability rights advocates.
“If the court rules Section 504 unconstitutional, people who benefit from the act would no longer get the help they need to survive, work, go to school, and more—without discrimination,” said Mike Folio, Legal Director of Disability Rights West Virginia.
The Potential Consequences of the Lawsuit
The most pressing concern is that the lawsuit could lead to the wholesale dismantling of Section 504, leaving millions of Americans with disabilities vulnerable to discrimination. In West Virginia alone, an estimated 400,000 individuals rely on the protections of Section 504 for equal access to education, healthcare, and public services.
“If this lawsuit succeeds, it would send a devastating message to people with disabilities: that their rights are no longer protected under federal law,” Folio added.
Some lawmakers, such as Delegate Mike Pushkin (D-Kanawha), have expressed concern that targeting a single aspect of the law could have unintended consequences: “The concern is they’re going after a small section of the code, but if they’re successful in throwing out that whole rule, it could really impact how we treat our special needs students.”
On the other hand, conservative lawmakers supporting the lawsuit claim that their goal is not to revoke disability rights but to ensure that gender dysphoria is not classified under the same protections as physical and developmental disabilities. “With the students with disabilities in public schools, I don’t have any fear of us being able to continue to protect them because that’s our duty,” said Senator Amy Grady (R-Mason).
The Role of West Virginia and the Political Landscape
West Virginia joined the lawsuit under the leadership of then-Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who is now the state’s governor. His successor, Attorney General JB McCuskey, has since stated that the lawsuit could be dismissed, pending a decision from the Trump administration on whether to remove the language in question.
The West Virginia Attorney General’s office issued a statement reassuring residents that protections under Section 504 would remain intact, stating: “We want to assure parents that the 504 program is not going away, and no changes have been or will be made to the services provided under the program. People with physical or mental impairments will continue to have access to the programs they need to be successful.”
However, disability advocates argue that the legal ambiguity surrounding the lawsuit is already causing fear and uncertainty. “The problem that I’m seeing now is neither the president nor the governor has adequately defined what DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) is,” said Folio. “Rather than taking a surgical scalpel to the issue, they’re taking a sledgehammer.”
The Bigger Picture: Disability Rights at Risk
Advocates are warning that this case is part of a broader trend of rolling back civil rights protections under the guise of political and ideological battles. The inclusion of gender dysphoria in Section 504 is now being used as a pretext to challenge the fundamental protections that people with disabilities have relied on for nearly 50 years.
“It’s one thing to litigate over gender dysphoria and transgender rights,” Folio noted. “It’s another thing to tell your grandparents, your aunts, your uncles, and your parents who are disabled that they have no rights.”
Conclusion
The Texas v. Becerra lawsuit has the potential to reshape the landscape of disability rights in the United States. While the lawsuit’s immediate focus is on the inclusion of gender dysphoria, the broader implications could be catastrophic for millions of disabled Americans who depend on Section 504 for protection against discrimination.
Disability rights organizations, lawmakers, and advocates continue to call for careful legal consideration, urging policymakers to avoid dismantling a vital legal safeguard in pursuit of a narrow political objective. As the case progresses, the future of disability rights in America hangs in the balance.
