Podcast Summary:
What happens when the foundation of disability rights is challenged? In this powerful conversation, Jeff Thompson welcomes back disability advocate and Villanova graduate Kaleigh Brendle to talk about the growing legal challenge to Section 504—one of the most important civil rights protections for people with disabilities. Kaleigh explains how recent lawsuits could weaken the requirement that people with disabilities receive services in the most integrated settings, a principle that helps keep people living, learning, and working in their communities rather than being pushed into institutions.
In response, Kaleigh founded Judys League, an organization dedicated to defending disability rights and raising awareness about what’s at stake. Throughout the conversation, she shares why Section 504 is the foundation for laws like the ADA and why public awareness and advocacy matter more than ever.
This episode is a call to action: stay informed, share the story, and remember that every voice can help protect the rights and opportunities that generations fought to achieve.
Find out more about Judys League on the web at JudysLeague.org and all the socials at JudysLeague. Connect up by sending an email to Judys League.
thanks for listening.
Full Transcript
{Music}
Jeff: Please welcome back to the studio, Villanova University graduate, class of 2025, Kaleigh Brendle.
Kaleigh: Honestly, it’s like the meat of section 504 that they’re going after.
Jeff: Disability advocate and founder of Judy’s League.
Kaleigh: In response to the initial lawsuit, I founded an organization called Judy’s League, and we are dedicated to defending disability rights from these ruthless attacks in this country. We have a website, Judy’s j d y s l e a g e. Org.
Jeff: So without further ado, here’s Kaleigh Brendle. We hope you enjoy!
Kaleigh: Part of Judy’s League’s work to is seeing if any state attorneys general would be willing to file as interveners to kind of actually provide a substantive defense to the law. So if you were a state attorney general listening to this, please contact Judy’s League. We would love to talk to you.
Jeff: Good morning.
Kaleigh: Good morning.
Jeff: Welcome to Blind abilities. I’m Geoff Thompson. I’m glad to have Kaleigh Brendle returning to the studio to talk about something that’s very important to the blindness and low vision community. Kaleigh, welcome back to Blind Abilities.
Kaleigh: Thank you so much for having me, I appreciate it.
Jeff: Kaleigh, last time you were on the show, we were talking about the challenges to section 504. Can you explain what’s happening and why people are paying attention now?
Kaleigh: So in order to explain that, I’m going to back up just a little bit and explain where we’re coming from. So 17 states initially had filed a complaint or a lawsuit actually, and they had titled it, you know, Texas v Kennedy because Texas was leading the charge. And Secretary Kennedy, through his capacity as director of HHS, was the person that was the defendant in the case. And so this lawsuit originally was saying that section 504 as a whole was unconstitutional. Right. And that would have been catastrophic. 70 million Americans identify as disabled, 7.5 million American children need this law as well. And so the disabled community fought back with vigor. But we were hopeful because we thought that that lawsuit had kind of gone dormant. There hadn’t been a lot of change in that. We were hoping that maybe the States and Kennedy, who had filed jointly with them, were abandoning ship. But on January 23rd, nine of those 17 continued their attack and made it a little bit more pointed, this time, a little more specific. And so now we have to contend with the fact that, okay, this case is not dead. Not only did they file a little, just a tiny new status report, they filed an entire new complaint. It was very lengthy and very detailed about what they wanted gone. So it’s become clear to us that there are specific provisions of section 504. Honestly, it’s like the meat of section 504 that they’re going after that we now have to very passionately defend from attacks.
Jeff: Are they trying to eliminate section 504 in its entirety, or are they just trying to weaken it?
Kaleigh: So what they’re specifically going after is the sentence that disabled people must receive services in the most integrated setting. The Biden administration made a new rule to kind of updates and strengthens 504. Nothing is drastically different. They kind of dramatize the final rule in their complaint and act like it’s this big, horrible thing when truly it’s not. It is completely in accordance with the original law. But that rule talks about the requirement that disabled people must receive services in the most integrated setting. That is a very valid and important sentence. It is corroborated by case law. It is corroborated by years of other language in previously adopted laws, and they’re taking issue with it. But the problem is, if that sentence is ruled unconstitutional, it doesn’t just show up in 504. It shows up in the Ada. And then you have the issue of least restrictive environment, which shows up in the individuals with Disabilities Education Act and is a very similar concept. Right. This idea that disabled people, to the maximum extent possible, have to get what they need in an environment that includes their able peers. That’s the sentiment here, and we cannot afford to lose that.
Jeff: That’s not far away from institutionalization.
Kaleigh: No it’s not. It’s not at all. And that’s another part of the language that they really have issue with, is that the 2024 ruling strengthened our protection against being institutionalized without our consent. That is something that there was a case called Olmstead that said that we cannot have happen, that we deserve to live in the community. We deserve to live, work and thrive in the community. Right. And it’s also important to note that the quality of these institutions is also still under intense scrutiny. You have a facility like Rottenberg in Massachusetts, where, um, and I’m going to provide a trigger warning here because I’m about to discuss very serious forms of institutional abuse. But disabled people have been electrically shocked in that facility. Food has been withheld. And those electric shocks nine times the amount of force of a cattle prod. They’ve shocked disabled children. They’ve shocked people for things as small as not taking off their coat right away. They’ve shot people for screaming when they were shocked. It’s barbaric. It’s torture. A UN official classified as torture. And so when you talk about disabled people’s right to live in the community, potentially being sideswiped, ending up in institutions again, that’s exposing disabled people to horrific forms of violence. So it isn’t just we want to live in the community, which, by the way, is enough, right? On its own. It’s also disabled. People need to be protected from these horrific, violent injustices that are happening in these facilities.
Jeff: Wow. This could possibly affect all the independent living services and supports.
Kaleigh: Yes. If you say that this specific sentiment is unconstitutional, that carries weight. People are going to use that. I can speak on this later, but my organization that I founded initially in response to the attacks against 504, we have been very busy with all of the other attacks that have been happening at both the state and federal level. Right. These attacks are happening even with these laws in place. Even with these protections codified, what happens if we lose them? That’s something that we’ve we’ve talked about and and worried about.
Jeff: Here’s an example. Like in Minnesota, if a child with a disability is in one district, they may receive services of extraordinaire. One block away, in another district, they may receive hardly anything because districts decide make those decisions. Now what these states, if this goes into effect, they could actually break it down from the federal having power and give the power to the states. So one state could do one thing, another state could do another, and it would make living conditions in one state dramatically different than another state.
Kaleigh: Yes, there’s a potential that if this case goes the way that the states and now HHS seem to want, we could be looking at a very different and more state by state in disability rights landscape there, because some states have been very good in fulfilling their obligations under 504, the Ada, the Ida, and making sure that everyone from children to older adults with disabilities get what they need right and are kept out of institutions and get what they need in school, at work, in health care. That’s an important one too. Not having their children taken away on account of their disability, which is something the 504 protects against. That’s something the complaint cites to, is the fact that 504 protects disabled parents from having their children taken without cause. And that’s something they say in the complaint, which I think is just it’s heartbreaking.
Jeff: Can you explain to the listeners how the 504, which is civil rights, bridges to the Ada? Some people may get Ada confused with 504 thinking that they’re all the same thing, but they’re not.
Kaleigh: So if you can imagine disability laws as a staircase, 504 is the bottom step, right? 504 is the foundation on which those other laws were built. So section 504 is the one that says if you receive federal funding, you cannot discriminate on the basis of disability. It’s also worth noting that is also something they take issue with in the complaint, which that is a very troubling sentiment that that sentence gives them pause. Right. I think everyone’s heard of the 504 plan, right. That’s the accommodations that you can receive in school, say, if you have ADHD or a disability that makes you maybe need extra time or a different testing environment, right. So your 504 plan helps millions of children every day.
Jeff: So the states are arguing that the federal can’t mandate the states to have to pay for that.
Kaleigh: No. So the the reason that they’re taking issue with that sentence about the federal funding is because they’re saying it violates the spending clause of the Constitution, right. So Congress can’t regulate how the states spend their money in that way, like it’s an unfair policing of of state spending. But that idea, right. You know, if you receive federal funding, you cannot discriminate on the basis of the identity insert here that is not just unique to disability. Other laws use that for race. It’s a well-known, established trend, right, that lawmakers have resorted to to protect minorities. But 504 just in general. Right. Anything tied to federal funding. If you receive even a drop of federal funding, you got to make your stuff accessible for disabled people. That could look like elevators and ramps, that could look like technological accessibility. But then on the Ada, right. That’s way, way, way, way more broad. So that is your civil rights law that is specifically in wholly devoted to making sure that disabled people get what they need, whether the setting is private, public, government, etc..
Jeff: So 504 is basically the foundation of the Ada.
Kaleigh: Yes, Ada was built on the foundation that 504 created.
Jeff: And chipping away at it is just going to weaken the entirety.
Kaleigh: It is a growing concern among the attorneys I’ve spoken with.
Jeff: I’m sure some people are concerned about this, obviously. What can they do? What are what are we doing?
Kaleigh: So in response to the initial lawsuit, I founded an organization called Judy’s League, and it’s a group of individuals of all abilities, and we are dedicated to defending disability rights from these ruthless attacks in this country. And our goal, right. And our kind of thought is that if America knew what was happening, they would rise up and they would make it known to, you know, speak truth to power and make it known that this is unacceptable, immoral, unethical, and very, very, very illegal. And, you know, not in compliance with the Constitution. So our objective is to make sure America finds out, because really this has not been covered in the media. This is not getting the attention it needs to. And every person knows someone with a disability and every person, maybe without realizing it sometimes, but uses these laws. Think about the woman with a stroller that is using those elevators and ramps. Think about your grandfather, right? Or your grandmother that maybe has the walking cane and needs that support. You know, think about your friend’s son, who maybe has autism spectrum disorder and needs those accommodations through the 504 plan. Everybody knows somebody that this affects. And so the best thing that we encourage people to do, and which we are doing our best to do, is tell people, make sure that people find out what’s happening, read about the complaint and read about how important 504 is, and then tell everyone you know.
Jeff: Yeah. When I saw the list of states, I was like, what? Our neighbors South Dakota, Montana. Come on. It’s nine of them right now, isn’t it?
Kaleigh: Yes, it’s nine.
Jeff: And where is it standing right now? They filed it. What’s the trajectory here?
Kaleigh: So eight states did withdraw, right? Because the kind of front that some of the states used was. Oh, well, we’re challenging the fact that in the 2024 final rule, they talk about gender dysphoria as a disability. That was kind of the initial angle, but then Kennedy took care of that through regulation. And, you know, it’s also worth noting that was in the preamble, right. So that was not going to be an issue. The Fourth Circuit had already ruled that gender dysphoria could be classified as a disability, so it wasn’t really something they could touch in the way that they think they were hoping. But now, in that entire new complaint that they filed in January, there’s no mention of gender dysphoria. They can’t hide anymore. They can’t say that that’s their issue because it is very clearly about the integrated setting mandate. It’s very, very obvious if you read the complaint. So they filed that entire new complaint in January. They’ve kind of continued to get their ducks in a row in February. So we don’t know what’s next. It could be kind of a joint status report like they’ve done before. And that’s the problem too, that I want to acknowledge is that typically when you have a case, or at least in what we hoped would happen, you have the plaintiffs, which are these states, and they’re saying all these ridiculous things about 504 and then the defendant is supposed to defend 504. Kennedy is not really doing that. He is filing jointly with the states. So part of Judy’s legal work, too, is seeing if any state attorneys general would be willing to file as intervenors to kind of actually provide a substantive defense to the law. So if you were a state attorney general listening to this, please contact Judy’s League. We would love to talk to you.
Jeff: And how can they get Ahold of Judy’s League?
Kaleigh: We have a website, Judy’s League.org.
We also have a Facebook and Instagram. All the handles are the same. It’s all Judy’s League j u d y s l e a g u e. There’s a contact us form on the the site. You can email us at Judy’s League at gmail.com. That’s j u d y s l e a g u e at gmail.com.
Jeff: After listening to you talk about this and you’ve done this before, I mean, I remember back when you were going up against the testing accommodations and that was against…
Kaleigh: College Board.
Jeff: Yeah, I remember that. That was that was awesome. And then you brought this up last time we had the 17 states going up against the 504 and everything. So you’ve done a great job of bringing awareness to it. And I’m glad you reached out to bring awareness to this too, because this is serious. But what I don’t really get is what benefit does Texas, Montana, South Dakota, these states, what are they trying to hang on to? What are they going for that’s going to better it for their constituents?
Kaleigh: So they make it about cost a lot as it typically is. And you know, the idea that this is kind of an unnecessary burden, they kind of act as though this is making them institute a fundamentally new system, which what it is, it’s just saying don’t segregate disabled people, don’t do things that would put us at risk of being institutionalized. Allow us to have the support we need. You know, because the money is there, right? So allow us to have the support we need to live in the community. That’s it. It’s nothing drastic, but they’re acting like it’s this massive, big, horrible, scary thing. And so when you paint it like that, of course, rationally it looks like, okay, well, let’s just get the big, horrible, scary thing out. And so that’s kind of the the way that they’ve executed this.
Jeff: I think when you leave it up to 50 different entities to come up with 50 different rules, regulations and stuff like that, you lose the effectiveness of having something in place so we can have the opportunity to level the playing field and, you know, be out there as a truly fine citizen.
Kaleigh: Yeah, no, it’s it’s it’s crucial that protections like this remain in place.
Jeff: I decided to dive in on this, and I dug in when you reached out. And there’s scenarios of maybe they’ll do this, maybe what’s the worst? Maybe they strike all of 504 down. Who knows what could happen with these times that are in place right now, have you thought about that?
Kaleigh: Yes, we have thought about, you know, the different scenarios that could take place there because there is technically a sentence in the complaint that says section 504 violates the spending clause and that basically, you know, the spending clause is a part of the Constitution, right? So there actually is a sentence in this new complaint that still says section 504 violates the Constitution. You know, that’s what it’s arguing. The difference is it’s not in the demands for relief section. So our hope is that, okay, they’re not asking for it to be unconstitutional on its face this time. It doesn’t look like it. Attorneys don’t think that’s where we’re headed, but it’s still one of those things where it’s still in the complaint. You know what I mean? So we don’t technically know. I think what we’re concerned about, though, is that they will strike this integrated setting sentence down and the protection against institutionalization part down. And then if they do that, then it goes up to the Fifth Circuit, and we don’t really want it doing that because the Fifth Circuit hasn’t been the kindest in the past. And then from there, there’s two options, right? While the Fifth Circuit is making their determination, either they will say, okay, the district court ruling stands, the integrated setting sentence is void right now, or we’re going to reverse that ruling. So integrated setting sentence is fine until we make our decision. So it is also something we’re scared of that like they might say yeah we’re going to keep that district court ruling in place until we decide what we want to do with it. You know, and court cases are not fast, right? This case started in September of 2024 and we haven’t gotten a decision yet. So a circuit court ruling could take just as long. Right. And so if we have a situation where integrated setting is gone already, that would be terrible.
Jeff: So this is what it sounds like to start surmounting a defense against it. You talked earlier about attorney generals getting on board. But right now there is there a major defense going up against this?
Kaleigh: I mean, you have disability rights organizations like the Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, like you have a lot of these organizations that are really robustly defending 504 to the best of their ability. I know I think there’s been some conversations about briefs being filed by some of these organizations in support of 504, but the media hasn’t gotten wind of it yet. So that’s something that we’re trying to change through our work, both on social media and the mainstream media. So we’re trying to make sure that people know about this, because the hope is that, like, if people know enough, you know, the attorneys general offices start getting flooded with those calls being like, what are you doing? A lot of bad press., I learned through my advocacy, sometimes bad press is the thing that gets people moving.
Jeff: Mhm. How about the NFB and the ACB? Are they on board?
Kaleigh: Yes, Yes they are. I think that the NFB, I can’t speak on the ACB as much, but the NFB is in one of those situations where there’s so many things going wrong. They’re trying to address everything as best they can, but we are working on something with them. I can’t go into too much detail about it yet, but I’m very honored to be in collaboration with NFB and for Judy’s League to Work with the NFB. It’s so hard, right? Because you just had the blind refugee that was killed by Ice. You had what they’re doing to Randolph-sheppard. So, you know, NFB has very much had their hands full. And so we are trying to to help out and get that dedicated attention on 504.
Jeff: That’s good. Once again, can you tell us how to get A hold of Judy’s League?
Kaleigh: Yes, you can follow us on Instagram or Facebook. At Judy’s League, you can direct message our Instagram or send something to our Facebook page. You can email us at JudysLeague@gmail.com. J u d y s l e a g u e at gmail.com. Or you can also feel free to DM me on any of my socials. That’s Kaleigh Brendle.
Jeff: I have a question. Where does the Judy come in? To the Judy’s League?
Kaleigh: Oh, I love this story. Okay, so Judy Heumann is one of the most influential disability rights activists in our space. She was a major force in getting section 504 signed, right? This was something that she fought for so hard. And, you know, she orchestrated a 23 day sit in to get 504 signed, and they had to deal with the attempted withholding of food. They had to deal with middle of the night fire alarms, bomb threats, all these things. And she kept at it. And all of these officials were underestimating the community and patronizing them. And she looked right at this one official and was like, you know, hey, as I’m talking, I’d appreciate it if you stop nodding your head like you understand what it’s like to live with this because you don’t understand.
Jeff: Oh, wow.
Kaleigh: You don’t get it. And it was the most powerful moment, truly, because everyone just was. It’s true. You’re right. They didn’t get it. And so she fought and they fought alongside her. And 504 got signed. And she passed away a few years ago. But I idolize the work that she did. I idolized her spirit and her fire and her tenacity. And so when I was thinking about the name and the fact that 504, her baby, right, was being attacked like that, it had to be Judy’s league. It had to be in her name.
Jeff: It’s amazing how we live our life, and we just go about our daily stuff and we just don’t realize what’s happening. Like there’s a quote out there, something democracy doesn’t happen in darkness or something of that nature. But if you’re not aware of something, there’s nothing you can do. So I’m glad you’re bringing awareness to this, this cause, and people have to start to pay attention because not everything is secure. Just because it’s been that way for many years, it seems like things are being chipped away at and supports and foundations are being challenged and demolished and things are crumbling around us. The things that got me through college and got me to where I am today, the rights that I had, you know, now they’re being challenged and it’s time to step up and do it for Judy, right?
Kaleigh: Yeah, Honor Judy. Protect 504.
Jeff: Kaleigh, any closing thoughts?
Kaleigh: I think I want to encourage people to stay as informed as they can. It’s a really difficult time. There’s so much negativity. There’s so many things that are going wrong. But we have to keep fighting for the people that came before us, for the people that come after us. Make sure that you do that self-care. Do what you need to do for you. Step away from it at points. It’s very important that you do that. You know, mentally that’s critical. But it’s really important that we keep, you know, hold the line essentially. And we make sure that these laws don’t go anywhere. So, you know, there’s always a place to help in movement. And I’m honored to be a part of it.
Jeff: I’m glad what you’re doing for other organizations too, like the National Association of Blind Students. When I was involved back in the day, I’d go in as an individual, a citizen to the Capitol here in Minnesota, and I would talk about it and they’d listen to it and they, you know, nod their head. But, when I went in as president of the Minnesota Association of Blind Students, it was like they leaned in and they listened and they took notes, because now they realize they represented a vast amount of students from Minnesota that they could carry, that they could voices. One voice can be heard, but voices, you have to listen. It seems like when you’re talking with representatives and stuff. So I like that. I like what you’re doing.
Kaleigh: Yeah. Thank you so much.
Jeff: Always a great time talking to Kaleigh Brendle. Be sure to contact her through Judy’s League. And that’s j u d y s l e a g u e and you can find all the links right in the show notes. Thanks for listening.
{Music}Jeff: For more podcasts with a blindness perspective check us out on the web at www.blindabilities .com. 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.