TOPEKA, Kan. — Republican attorneys general from 17 states are reaffirming their commitment to a significant federal statute that safeguards the rights of individuals with disabilities. This declaration comes in light of concerns raised by parents fearing that essential services for their disabled children could be compromised due to a GOP lawsuit challenging transgender rights.
The coalition, spearheaded by Texas, recently informed a federal judge that their September lawsuit is directed solely at a regulation implemented by the Biden administration last year. This regulation asserts that transgender individuals are afforded protection under a 1973 law which prohibits discrimination against disabled individuals. The state attorneys general clarified that their legal action does not target the law itself, which mandates that organizations receiving federal funding provide reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities.
Initially, the lawsuit garnered minimal attention, but interest surged approximately a month ago when disability rights advocates raised concerns that specific elements of the lawsuit could undermine decades of established protections for disabled individuals. Among the concerned parents are John and Tayler Cantrell from Topeka, whose son, Cooper, was born with a medical condition that left half of his brain irreparably damaged. They regard the anti-discrimination law as essential for their child’s development and well-being.
“This law levels the playing field, granting every child, regardless of their challenges, an opportunity to succeed,” stated John Cantrell at a recent press conference organized by Democratic legislators.
The lawsuit contends with a rule set forth by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in May, which posits that, under federal anti-discrimination statutes, gender dysphoria may be classified as a disability. The states involved in the lawsuit express concern that they may face a loss of federal funding for failing to acknowledge the gender identities of transgender individuals.
One aspect of the legal challenge is labeled “Section 504 is Unconstitutional,” referencing a fundamental part of the 1973 anti-discrimination legislation. Another provision requests the court to restrain HHS from enforcing Section 504. While the attorneys general insist that those claims pertain solely to the specific HHS rule, the language has led to misunderstandings regarding their intentions.
“I believe many people unfamiliar with legal jargon misinterpreted the implications of the complaint,” explained Jeff LeMaster, representing Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, one of the participants in the coalition.
Additionally, the attorneys general indicated in their filing that the lawsuit is currently pending while the Trump administration reviews the HHS regulation. During his tenure, Trump issued executive orders aimed at curtailing rights for transgender individuals, potentially leading to a repeal of the HHS rule.
Brenna Bird, the Republican attorney general from Iowa, contended that the Biden administration’s approach to the new rule jeopardizes the resources available to disabled children. “I am pursuing this lawsuit to ensure that children and all Americans with disabilities can access the support they require to thrive,” Bird affirmed in a statement.
In contrast, Kansas state Rep. Alexis Simmons, a Democrat from Topeka, criticized the Republican officials’ focus on transgender issues, suggesting that it inadvertently targets the rights of disabled Americans as well. “We felt it was imperative to elevate the concerns of our constituents,” she noted. “Their voices needed to be heard, and action was necessary to protect their interests.”
