On September 23, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order in Texas, et al. v. Kennedy (Case No. 5:24-cv-00225) vacating multiple provisions of the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Section 504 regulation relating to the integration mandate.

In issuing the order, the court granted a joint motion that was filed last month by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the plaintiffs in the case.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in federally assisted and federally conducted programs, and the integration mandate requires covered entities to administer programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of individuals with disabilities.

Among the regulatory provisions in HHS’ Section 504 regulations that were struck are:

• the definition of “most integrated setting” at 45 C.F.R. § 84.10;
• the general requirement that an HHS recipient administer programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities at 45 C.F.R. § 84.68(d);
• the entire integration provision which includes specific prohibitions against segregation and institutionalization at 45 C.F.R. § 84.76; and
• the application of the integration mandate to an HHS recipient’s existing facilities, education programs, and medical diagnostic equipment at 45 C.F.R. §§ 84.22(b), 84.43(d) and 84.93(b), respectively.

We remain deeply concerned about the impact that this order will have on the ability of older adults with disabilities to continue to receive services and supports in their communities.

It is important to underscore that this action does not change: Section 504 or the Americans with Disabilities Act—the underlying statutes that prohibit disability-related discrimination; the Supreme Court precedent established by Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring, 527 U.S. 581 (1999), which affirmed the integration mandate under these civil rights statutes; or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) home and community-based services settings rule, which is governed by a completely separate statute—the Social Security Act.

However, the order is likely to generate confusion and may precipitate policy changes that could limit access to certain community-based programs for individuals with disabilities.

We are disappointed by the DOJ and HHS’ complete retreat from advancing and enforcing the integration mandate, which undermines the stated mission of the Department of Justice’s Disability Rights Section “to advance the nation’s goal of equal opportunity, integration, full participation, inclusion, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for people with disabilities through enforcement, regulation, and technical assistance.”​