Podcast Audio Page
Podcast Summary
This podcast episode highlights the alarming legal challenge to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a foundational disability rights law in the United States. Kaleigh Brendle, a student advocate, explains that 17 attorneys general have filed a lawsuit arguing that Section 504 is unconstitutional. If repealed, this could strip away protections for millions of disabled Americans, impacting education, employment, healthcare, and accessibility. The conversation emphasizes the lack of media coverage on the issue and urges public action to defend disability rights. The discussion also connects this case to broader civil rights issues, stressing the potential consequences of dismantling federal oversight on disability protections.
Here is a link to the article with Kaleigh Brendle on USA Today.
Full Transcript
Jeff: Please welcome back a good friend of the show, Kaleigh Brendle.
{Music}
Kaleigh: 17 attorneys general sued the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and they claimed that section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was unconstitutional.
Jeff: Kaleigh is an advocate and very determined.
Kaleigh: That’s been one of the most frustrating aspects of advocating for this case is the lack of media attention.
Jeff: Without further ado, here’s Kaleigh Brendle.
Kaleigh: We cannot let them take our rights in silence.
Jeff: Welcome to Blind Abilities, I’m Jeff Thompson. Today, returning to the studio is Kaleigh Brendle, and she’s a senior at Villanova University and is the vice president of the Association of Blind Students of Pennsylvania. Kaleigh, welcome back to Blind Abilities.
Kaleigh: Thank you so much. It’s great to be back.
Jeff: Yeah. Where’s the time gone? I can’t believe it’s been five years. I know back then you were fighting for the accommodations for exams.
Kaleigh: Yeah. Really, really appreciate your help with that whole experience, and very grateful that we were able to get the accommodations and supports that we needed.
Jeff: That’s awesome. And now something else has just hit the fan, which could impact all blind and low vision people. Kaleigh, bring us on board.
Kaleigh: So in September of 2024, 17 attorneys general sued the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and they claimed that section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was unconstitutional. Now, this is one of the foundational disability laws in our country. This is a law that I’m happy to kind of go into. One of the many facets that 504 makes a difference in disabled people’s lives daily. But it’s a very integral law, and the loss of this law would be felt by the 1 in 4 Americans who identify as disabled. And recently in February, under the administration change, the suit took on a different defendant. But the Health and Human Services party still remained. But they submitted a joint brief. So the 17 states and Health and Human Services submitted a brief together where we found out that HHS agrees that 504 needs to go. So the next hearing for this case is slated for April 21st. It is in the hands of a Texas district court judge appointed by President Donald Trump. And that judge is going to determine, at least at this level, what happens to 504. So it’s completely up to him right now.
Jeff: Now, Biden’s administration added some well needed updates, and that’s basically where they started looking at. But as in talks with you, it’s a lot more than just one line item.
Kaleigh: Yes. So the Biden administration added several important updates to 5.4. These include protections for disabled parents so that their children couldn’t be taken without cause, additional standards for web accessibility and medical device accessibility, making sure that people are not placed in institutions forcibly. People are given the services that they need in the most integrated setting, but the one that is receiving a lot of political attention is the designation of gender dysphoria as a disability under section 504, but if that was the only complaint, then that could have been established in the complaint. You know that they filed with the court, but instead, these 17 attorneys general took this opportunity to attempt to strike down the entire law. So, like the bulk of the first portion of the complaint does pertain to the gender dysphoria edition. But if you read further, you see the issue that they take with the integrated setting. You see the issue that they take with us having protection from being placed in an institution. They actually quote a passage from Justice Kennedy in which she articulates that placing a disabled person in an institution or segregating them is not always discriminatory. They quote that in the complaint, and if you go down to count three, I believe it’s prong D, you see that they want to make the entire law unconstitutional. So the gender dysphoria aspect is definitely something they take issue with, but they really want the whole law gone. And they’ve made that very clear, just in a very subtle way.
Jeff: I think the underlying thing is they want the states to not have to follow the regulations that the feds put in for receiving funds, and they’re trying to get everything to be basically every state would be different, wouldn’t it?
Kaleigh: So I am not an attorney, so I would need to kind of do a little more research on this. But from my understanding, if something is declared unconstitutional, that doesn’t just become a state’s rights matter, that becomes a. You can’t touch this matter. And I think there might be a conception that it is a state’s rights thing, but truthfully, this would touch the private sector as well. And this would touch schools. So 504 enshrines the right of millions of disabled children to have a plan in school. If you have a child with ADHD or with autism, or with a learning disability, or who, like me, is blind, like, you know, those accommodations are critical and that plan could be stripped. And I think it’s telling that they’ve kept this case so quiet. I was having a conversation with my senior thesis advisor. He has no connections to, you know, a no overt connections, in his eyes to the disabled community that I was explaining the suit and he goes, whoa, whoa whoa whoa. Two of my three kids have 504. And that’s the aspect that people don’t understand yet, is that this is going to touch so many families, like 504 is also the reason that we have accessibility in buildings. It states that no program or entity that receives federal funding can discriminate on the basis of disability, and disabled people need to be able to enjoy all the benefits conferred by that program or service.
Kaleigh: That doesn’t mean only that, you know, I need my documents in an accessible format, that I need my documents in Braille or any other means. That also means that I, you know, if I were a wheelchair user, that I would need to be able to access a structure, I would need to be able to get into that building. There would need to be elevators or ramps. But what’s important, too, is think about a mom with a stroller, right? That would need that elevator. Think about a grandparent that might need that ramp like disability. This is my favorite quote from activist Judy Heumann. Disability is a family you can join at any time. And because of the strides that have been made in accessibility that’s benefited the community as a whole. I know perfectly abled people who love audiobooks, right. And the truncated domes on sidewalks. So there are so many inventions that may have been for us, but that benefit others as well. And this is really going to affect more people than I think even the attorneys general realize.
Jeff: Even reasonable accommodations that’s in there.
Kaleigh: Exactly. There are so many bits of language that are covered by this statute that would, if taken, the Ada would be undermined idea. The individuals with Disabilities Education Act would be undermined because that language is mirrored in those other statutes.
Jeff: So why did health services get involved in it? Why did they take on to this?
Kaleigh: So they were the ones being sued. So Xavier Becerra was the secretary of health and Human services under former President Biden. And when President Trump was elected and, you know, inaugurated, he appointed Robert F Kennedy Jr to serve as the new secretary of HHS. And under Vecerra, HHS was not moving. They were not agreeing with these 17 states that the law needed to go. About two weeks into RFK’s term, suddenly you had this joint brief being submitted in which it was communicated that things had changed, but something important for people to know. If they read this brief, you are not immediately going to sense that you’re not going to sense the amount of trouble that we’re facing, because in that brief, they’re like, we never wanted to make section 504 unconstitutional. We just wanted to touch a few teeny tiny little parts of it. Right. Two things to note. One, they never changed the language of the original complaint they filed. So it’s empty words. It’s appeasing the media. It’s taking the heat off their backs. Because if they really wanted to protect 504, they would have taken that harmful language out. But they left it alone. They kept it in. So they’re saying, no, we don’t want to make it unconstitutional. But yet if you look at the court filing, what does it say? Count three pronged still wants to make it unconstitutional. And second, those little parts that they have an issue with integrated setting protecting us from being in an institution. I’m going to take that out. And then they only want protection from discrimination in certain sectors, and education and health care are not covered in their new vision of what they want for 501. So they essentially want us segregated, put in institutions not given coverage for discrimination in education or health care, and essentially just walked back to the 70s in terms of the rights that you would have.
Jeff: Over 50 years. I mean, these are civil rights.
Kaleigh: They are. And you remind me of something, too. You mentioned civil rights. The language of 504 is very similar to another statute, title six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states that no program or entity receiving federal financial assistance can discriminate on the basis of race or national origin. The wording that they take issue with in 504 is the no entity receiving federal financial assistance can discriminate on the basis of X, right. That’s the part they don’t like because they say it violates the spending clause of the Constitution. If they strike that down on that basis, that leaves the Civil Rights Act up for attack and other statutes that to protect minoritized identities up for attack because they don’t like if you receive federal funding, you can’t discriminate. Apparently, that’s wrong in their eyes.
Jeff: Okay, I heard an argument. I know this has been in effect for over 50 years, but you’re trying to go back to the 70s when this was put into effect, when states first agreed to federal funding rules. They’re saying that this is unconstitutional because back in the 70s, it changed what they originally agreed to.
Kaleigh: I think it’s just the updated rules from the Biden administration kind of flagged 504 on their radar. They think that two of the things that appease that demographic and that base are fighting gender ideology and eliminating wasteful spending. And so this is an opportunity for them to secure a win on both of those fronts, regardless of what it’s putting the LGBTQ plus community through and what it’s putting the disabled community through, and what it could potentially put other minoritized communities through.
Jeff: So where are we with this case now?
Kaleigh: The case is now called Texas v Kennedy because Texas is leading the 17 states in the charge. The case was filed in September and that’s something to the public. Didn’t find out about this until February. Somehow they kept this so discreet. We did not find out about it for months. And on February 19th, we found out that HHS agreed that the law needs to go, no matter how they tried to spin it. You know, we found out they agree, and we’re supposed to receive a status update on the 21st or 20th of every month. But there is a hearing tentatively scheduled for April 21st. That’s the date that I’ve been seeing. Important to note to Judge James Wesley Hendrix, the judge that was assigned to this case. I’ve read up on his prior case law. He has made a few rulings that I very wholeheartedly disagree with as they pertain to minorities. He struck down a law that would help pregnant women. He issued an injunction on that law. But with Judge Hendrix, he struck down that law. And we are afraid that he could enjoin 504 so he could say, until another judge says otherwise. 504 is dead. And that would have really horrific implications overnight.
Jeff: Wow.
Kaleigh: We would hope not.
Jeff: That would really impact students right off the bat.
Kaleigh: I know personally I am planning on taking the LsAT in June and August. Those two administrations of the exam. It is hard enough for blind students to receive accommodations in the law school process as it is. You add this to the mix genuinely. Like, I don’t know how that’s going to work because honestly, like I have additional disabilities on top of the blindness, and this could really affect my ability to receive the accommodations that I need to be successful on this one test that, because of law school admissions criteria, is going to dictate my future. Like this one sitting will have such a profound effect on what happens to me.
Jeff: I mean, even colleges may not have to provide disability service offices.
Kaleigh: So that could be a little bit more up to them. It is the 504 plans will get hit and the public schools will get hit K-12 with colleges. If it’s a privately funded university, you would hope that they would keep it. But I mean, in theory, if they wanted to, like, you know what I mean? As long as there’s a drop of federal funding. Right. It’s a landscape that I’ve never really had to think about.
Jeff: Typically, people could protest. Yes, and the feds could come in and help, but it doesn’t seem like the feds want to come in and help anymore.
Kaleigh: Well, now, in the past two days, you have the Department of Education and everything that’s happened to that. And that was one of our greatest, most steadfast allies. I know when I was on here five years ago talking about what happened with College Board and the way that they revoked critical accommodations for blind students to be successful in the AP exams. One of the first actions I, alongside the National Federation of the blind, took was filing class complaints with the United States Department of Education and the Department of Justice and the Doe. We had a case number in like two weeks. We were meeting with federal attorneys. We had really incredible support and I don’t know what happens now.
Jeff: Hmm. Before we started the podcast, you mentioned USA today and an article and you said they really did your homework, which seems exciting especially you don’t hear anything about this?
Kaleigh: Yes. I think honestly, that’s been one of the most frustrating aspects of advocating for this case is the lack of media attention. I have had so many conversations with parents of disabled children, with peers, with disabled community members themselves, and I have heard a million times now, oh my God, I didn’t know this was happening. Like, I got to tour the Louisiana Center for the blind right now. And on my flight down here, I was talking to a student from Atlanta, and I was telling her that this was happening. And I said, if you have any friends that have 504 plans, let them know this is coming, please. And she was just like, oh my God. Like, you know, she was just shocked. But to your point about USA today, I was very fortunate that I heard back from an education reporter there and she had heard about it anyway, because a friend of hers had a child benefited from 504. And so she interviewed me and she interviewed other disability experts and people very familiar with disability law. And it was a very well done piece, and we’re extremely grateful for the coverage. And we are really hopeful that this will encourage other major media outlets to cover this case, too, because we’re running out of time genuinely, and the 17 states and HHS are locked in. We need to kind of show that the public and the court of public opinion is not going to accept this.
Jeff: Yeah. I hope our voices can be heard. And thank you for helping our voice be heard. Now, when you were talking about who’s impacted by this, let’s take K through 12. Someone who is diagnosed with autism is on the spectrum. They have supports and programs that help them in the classroom setting in the educational system. Yet I don’t know how many parents know that section 504 is in the crosshairs of being annihilated.
Kaleigh: Yeah. And I mean, honestly, the classroom aspect. But, you know, 504 covers someone that, you know, you can’t be denied a position if you’re qualified for that position, you can’t be denied based on your disability alone. And I’ve seen far too many cases of qualified applicants for jobs being denied because of their disability alone. And you take a vote 504. I did a whole article for a class where I called. I think it was called The Empty Cradle How the US Child Welfare System Discriminates Against Disabled Mothers. And I heard stories about disabled parents in the hospital having their children taken away before they have the opportunity to prove that they’re competent parents. Because of the assumptions that society has about blind people and disabled people as a whole, and institutions. God help us if that’s where we end up going, because. Have you heard of Willow brook? I know a lot of people haven’t heard of the case of willow brook, but that was a case where disabled people were malnourished, neglected, experimented on for medical purposes, like barely kept alive. And I pray that if this is where we go, there needs to be more federal oversight, because I believe the number was 36. States still operate institutions. Pennsylvania, where I go to school, has four. And the idea that they don’t like us being out here and they might prefer us in there is genuinely disgusting.
Jeff: I think having the federal oversight is the big key here, because when you have 50 states and 50 situations, 50 different, it can go everywhere. It’s going to pit states against states in a sense of where people live.
Kaleigh: It is I was sitting here this morning and reading over that list of states that filed, and I was just like, I don’t want to live anywhere in there because you don’t want like, I would never want to live in a state that thinks it’s acceptable to do this and to live in a state where there are still states where disabled people can be sterilized. I believe the number is 31. It’s heartbreaking.
Jeff: Hmm. What can people do.
Kaleigh: Tell everyone you know. Genuinely the biggest thing that we can do is rally the public here. And if you have media connections use them. And of course the organizations like the National Federation of the blind have done a remarkable job of putting the pressure on the attorneys general and the, you know, the government in those 17 states. And that’s something that we need to keep up and let them know that this is an unpopular, not just unpopular, but immoral stance to take. So that’s important. Like, if you’re a mother of a disabled child, send a testimony. Let them know what this would do. I think that’s a key part too, is keeping up that effort. But just tell people we cannot let them take our rights in silence.
Jeff: Hmm. We got to get the word out. So thanks for reaching out on blind abilities to bring this to the attention. I’m so glad that we’re able to put this out there so other people will be able to learn more about it. Because I was just thinking about it. I got a grandson who has autism. There’s 504 involved there.
Kaleigh: Yeah.
Jeff: You know, it’s like my family’s impacted myself. Anybody else? That’s. Wow. Thank you so much for getting the word out here.
Speaker3: Thank you so much.
Jeff: I always love having Kaleigh Brando on this show. So if you feel this is a cause worth fighting for, please reach out to your representatives, reach out to your attorney generals and let them hear your story. Let them hear your testimony. Let them hear how you feel. As Kaleigh mentioned, we cannot let them take our rights in silence. Check out the show notes for the link to the article with Kaleigh Brendle on USA today. And as always, stay well, stay informed and stay strong. Until next time. Bye bye.
For more podcasts with The Blindness perspective, check us out on the web at BlindAbilities.Com, on Twitter at Blind Abilities and download the free Blind Abilities app from the App Store. That’s two words, Blind Abilities. And if you want to leave some feedback, give us some suggestions. Give us a call at (612) 367-6093. We’d love to hear from you. I want to thank you for listening. And until next time, bye bye.
[Music] [Transition noise] –
When we share-
What we see
-Through each other’s eyes…
[Multiple voices overlapping, in unison, to form a single sentence]
…We can then begin to bridge the gap between the limited expectations, and the realities of Blind Abilities