The Limits of Vouchers in Texas

In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 7.5 million children 3 to 21 years old received services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in AY 2022-23.

About 980,000 of them were autistic, up from 498,000 in 2012-13.

The Trump administration is halving the Department of Education staff, which is proposing to close.  It supports school choice, which is fine when there are schools to choose from.  That is not always the case.

Jessica Ma, Dallas Morning News:

The Texas Education Freedom Accounts promised vouchers would give students with special needs options beyond public schools. Despite being awarded taxpayer-funded accounts, many families struggled to find a suitable school to spend it on. This means private education is still out of reach for Texas’ most vulnerable children, critics of the voucher program say.

“Private does not always mean better,” Ross said. “With more opportunity, comes more work, more heartbreak, more disappointment.”

Proponents believe private schools will proliferate and meet demand. The comptroller’s office, which oversees TEFA, plans to survey families to understand why they opted out, and their responses will inform the improvements made to the program, a spokesperson said. It’s also possible parents were unaware of deadlines, considering public school, or moved out of state, he said.

While 29,400 applicants with disabilities were deemed eligible, at least 7,400 have since returned their voucher. By early September, a total of 27,500 students left the funds on the table, according to data received through a public records request. The Dallas Morning News spoke to six North Texas parents about the challenges they faced in their private school search.

Many were told their child’s needs couldn’t be accommodated. Others realized the prospective school was too far or too expensive. And there were those left waiting for replies that never came. All applied — swayed by the prospect of a private education.

In August, Jessica Ma reported:

The data, which gives a snapshot as of Aug. 5, shows that more than 20,700 students opted out. About 14,100 students, or 68%, were enrolled in a public school during the 2024-25 school year.

Students with disabilities were the first in line to receive a voucher. The state deemed 29,400 applicants in this first tier eligible. About 7,300 — nearly 1 in 4 — opted out, records show.

It’s an uphill battle for these students, said David DeMatthews, a professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Texas at Austin. A low-income child with intensive needs will especially struggle to find a suitable school, he said.

The more severe the needs, the more expensive the services. But specialized private schools for students with disabilities tend to be concentrated in urban metro areas. Seats are limited and tuition gets high — sometimes reaching over $40,000.

“Those with the most need are going to be the least likely to get help from this program,” DeMatthews said.

 

Governors Push Back on DOJ's Efforts to Undercut Olmstead

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Trump does not care.  He despises people with disabilities.  His head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division is a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

In August, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Eighteen governors signed a letter asking the Justice Department to stop its efforts to undercut enforcement of the Olmstead decision.  

For nearly four decades, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has embodied a fundamental national commitment that disability should not be a basis for exclusion or diminished opportunity.  States have worked with local and federal government partners since 1990 to implement both the letter and spirit of this much-celebrated, bipartisan law.  On June 18, 2026, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal opinion that questions the longstanding legal framework surrounding the rights of Americans with disabilities to live with dignity, independence, and full community participation.  On July 20, 2026, the DOJ declared that it will not rely on its own longstanding Olmstead guidance, issued June 22, 2011. 

As Governors, we are deeply concerned by the federal government’s retreat from its longstanding role in protecting the right to community integration and that such actions signal changes to programs serving individuals with disabilities. For more than 25 years, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C. has built on the commitment of the ADA and reinforced the principle that people with disabilities should have the opportunity to live, work, receive services, and participate in their communities rather than being unnecessarily segregated in institutional settings. This is a principle Americans are proud of and is a Northstar internationally for people with disabilities. 

This principle has changed lives and transformed this country. Red and blue states have spent decades investing in home and community based services, developing supportive housing, expanding access to education and employment opportunities, and redesigning and strengthening community based services.  These efforts reflect not only our progress under federal civil rights law, but our shared conviction that people with disabilities belong in their communities, whenever possible.  

Recent actions have already created significant uncertainty for states and for the workforce of dedicated individuals who support people with disabilities throughout the country.  More importantly, people with disabilities and their families are terrified about moving backwards - or worse - becoming institutionalized against their will - after decades of advocacy.  We simply cannot risk reversing the progress this country has made in ensuring Americans with disabilities have meaningful choices about where and how they live their lives.   

We strongly oppose any federal actions that would weaken protections against unnecessary segregation or diminish the right of people with disabilities to receive services in the most integrated settings appropriate to meet their needs, consistent with established Olmstead precedent.  Community integration is not an abstract legal concept. It means having a home, being able to work, attend school, shop, worship, build relationships, and participate in an ordinary civic life.  

This is not a partisan issue. The ADA was enacted with overwhelming bipartisan support and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. The continued movement toward community-based services has progressed under Republican and Democratic administrations and in states led by Governors of both parties.  States may differ in how we administer these services but we stand united around the basic principle that Americans with disabilities are full members of our communities and should not be forced into segregation to receive the services and support they need.   

We stand ready to work with the Administration and Congress to strengthen community-based systems while preserving individual choice.  We must ensure that our nation continues moving toward greater independence, inclusion, and opportunity for all Americans with disabilities.  We urge you not to turn back the clock on generations of progress.  

•  Governor Kathy Hochul State of New York 
• Governor Ned Lamont State of Connecticut 
• Governor JB Pritzker State of Illinois 
• Governor Wes Moore State of Maryland 
• Governor Gretchen Whitmer State of Michigan 
• Governor Mikie Sherrill State of New Jersey 
• Governor Katie Hobbs State of Arizona 
• Governor Matt Meyer State of Delaware 
• Governor Janet Mills State of Maine 
• Governor Maura Healey State of Massachusetts 
• Governor Tim Walz State of Minnesota 
• Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham State of New Mexico 
• Governor Josh Stein State of North Carolina 
• Governor Josh Shapiro State of Pennsylvania 
• Governor Bob Ferguson State of Washington 
• Governor Tina Kotek State of Oregon 
• Governor Dan McKee State of Rhode Island 
• Governor Tony Evers State of Wisconsin 

The Community Integration Reversal and Transition Plans

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Trump does not care.  He despises people with disabilities.  His head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division is a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

In August, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Caitlynn Peetz Stephens at Education Week:

New federal guidance threatens to upend decades of progress in high school transition planning, which helps students with disabilities prepare for college, the workforce, and living independently, advocates and researchers say.

In 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Olmstead v. L.C. that states must eliminate unnecessary segregation of people with disabilities and ensure they receive services in “the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.” The ruling established that unjustified institutionalization constitutes discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

But in June, the U.S. Department of Justice stated it “will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement” of the ADA, and that Olmstead is “not enforceable.”

The Olmstead ruling has for decades served as the backbone of students’ individualized education programs (IEPs) by requiring transition plans that teach students with disabilities 16 and older independent living skills.

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, transition plans must include goals related to postsecondary education or training, employment, and, if appropriate, independent living.

“To have a document that says segregated living is OK and transitioning into that integrated setting isn’t the priority, it’s really the antithesis of what we’re working for for 21 years of their lives in special education,” said Meghan Burke, a professor of special education at Vanderbilt University. “If now we’re saying it’s no longer the goal for youth with disabilities to be living in the community, it could potentially turn everything in transition planning on its head.”

Special Ed Official Quits

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of turning it into a block grant, they have tried firing most of the staff who enforce it.   More recently, they have shifted  OSERS to HHS and OCR to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, headed by a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

Zachary Schermele at USA TODAY:

The top Trump administration official overseeing special education is resigning ahead of a contentious reshuffling of her office's workforce to the Health and Human Services Department.

Kelly Rogers, the acting assistant secretary in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, is set to depart her job on Friday, Sept. 11, according to an email obtained by USA TODAY. She was in the job for fewer than four months.

The shift injects yet another element of volatility into the work of the federal division in charge of administering billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to states and schools to help students with disabilities. The office, which experts have described as the "engine room" of special education, has been particularly rocked over the past year and a half by President Donald Trump's crusade to dismantle the Education Department. The downsizing campaign has led to many morale-sinking changes, including major layoffs and a scrutinized plan to give HHS a greater role in the division's operations.

Rogers' abrupt exit comes as more than 100 employees in her division are set to physically move over to HHS this week, according to the Education Department's union, which opposes the move and calls it illegal. Congressional Democrats, and even some Republicans, have expressed doubts about the benefits of the reorganization, which Trump administration officials have said is part of their broader efforts to limit the federal role in education. Rogers struggled during a July 9 meeting to assuage disability advocates' concerns about potential bureaucratic dysfunction caused by the shift, USA TODAY previously reported.

Backward on Community Integration

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Trump does not care.  He despises people with disabilities.  His head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division is a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

In August, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Jayme Fraser at USA Today:

On Aug. 31, the Trump administration moved to make it easier for states to place disabled and elderly people in institutions. To appease a lawsuit from several Republican-led states, government lawyers told a federal judge they were willing to erase a 50-year-old provision requiring federal funds be used to care for people in their homes, whenever possible.

In effect, it undermines a landmark Supreme Court case from Papadopoulos’ home state that said denying people the ability to live in their communities is discrimination.

Advocates say the government’s concession erodes hard-fought civil rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. And it threatens the return of a system where disabled people are locked in institutions instead of being allowed to live in their homes.

From the American Association of People with Disabilities:

The Defend Community Integration Coalition (DCIC) strongly condemns the recent proposed joint resolution filed August 31 in the ongoing case Texas v. Kennedy. The proposed resolution aims to strike down the 2024 community integration regulations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This action flies in the face of decades of judicial precedent and Congressional intent to ensure that community integration remains a civil right for all people with disabilities.

As national disability rights leaders and allies, we have worked hard for decades to advance community integration as a foundational civil right for people with disabilities. We condemn any attacks aimed at undoing this work led by and for people with disabilities.

For people with disabilities, there is no right more foundational than the right to make our own choices. Far too often, we find ourselves in the position where others decide our lives for us. It takes a lot to ensure that the choices we have are real choices. It has taken years to build the supports we need to go to school, work, eat, stay housed, and raise our children.

As humans, we deserve the security of knowing that we have what we need to live our lives.

Life is not just about getting three square meals a day and getting our meds on time. It is about growing, working, loving, dreaming, failing and reaching our potential. It is about deciding when to get up, when to go out, what to eat, and with whom to live. It is hard to do these things when we are forced to stay in congregate settings where we have no say over most aspects of our lives.

Disabled people are survivors. We are spouses, parents, siblings, classmates, colleagues, and neighbors. Most of all, we are Americans determined to fight back against ideas and actions that take away our dignity and roll back years of hard-fought progress and rights.

As a coalition we will continue to work together and fight for the full realization of the community integration mandate. Community integration of people with disabilities is non-negotiable.

This is a monumental fight. In a moment like this, we need to join forces and work collectively. We are stronger together.

Join the Defend Community Integration Coalition: https://bit.ly/3V8NfIy
Additional Resources and Calls to Action

• AAPD’s webinar “Understanding and Protecting Your Disability Rights Under Olmstead, the ADA, and Section 504” and action steps: https://bit.ly/4gCGaHi
• Statement of National Disability Organizations on the Proposed Resolution: https://bit.ly/4zTYapt
• DREDF’s Resource Page: https://bit.ly/4h78eEf
• An excellent summary from Red Line for Civil Rights: https://bit.ly/4qNSTeZ

Administration Cuts Research On Parents with Disabilities

Many posts have discussed Trump's bad record on disability issues. As his words and actions have shown, he despises Americans with disabilities. He told his nephew Fred that severely disabled people -- such as Fred's son -- should "just die."

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of shifting it to a block grant, they are firing most of the staff who enforce it.  A judge has temporarily paused the attack, but the administration will likely find ways to ignore or circumvent the order.

Roni Caryn Rabin at NYT:

The Trump administration has eliminated a funding stream that for the last 30 years has supported the only U.S. government-backed national research center focused on parents with disabilities.

The National Research Center for Parents with Disabilities will begin to phase out its operations on Aug. 31, when the current five-year grant ends, officials from the center said.

The center, based at Brandeis University’s Heller School for Social Policy and Management, is a multiple university collaboration aimed at improving the lives of the 4.5 million U.S. parents with disabilities and their families. The center, which funds researchers in Boston and around the country, analyzes health care access and economic hardships faced by parents with disabilities and tracks state laws, serving as a clearinghouse for information on the issue.

The government has supported the center for decades through a competitive grant that has provided $500,000 a year in recent years and was slated to increase. Monika Mitra, the center’s director, said that an initial notice announcing the grant was posted a year ago, as is usually the case. But the more detailed information required to submit an application, which normally arrives in the grant application portal by February, never appeared. In July, the original link announcing the grant vanished.

...

The withdrawal of the funding comes in the wake of a series of administration announcements that have raised concerns for people with disabilities. In June, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a memo indicating that states were not required to provide services enabling people with disabilities to remain in their homes and not be forced into institutions. The administration also announced plans to move special education programs and civil rights enforcement in education out of the Education Department, which raised concerns among advocates who said the step would weaken oversight.

Assault on Integration

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Trump does not care.  He despises people with disabilities.  His head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division is a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

Last week, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Jonaki Mehta at NPR:

[In 1999] the Supreme Court handed down the Olmstead decision. It reinforced the ADA's integration mandate, which says people with disabilities should get to learn, live and work in their communities rather than in institutions. The government made that promise after people with disabilities fought against segregation in institutions, which have a long history of abuse and neglect.

...

In practice, the integration mandate requires that states provide people with disabilities the services they need to thrive in their homes or communities — in other words, in the most integrated setting possible. For someone with intellectual or developmental disabilities, that could mean a personal care worker helping them to get dressed or eat, or a case manager helping them find a job or housing, among other services.

Now, a lawsuit brought by several Republican-led states, Texas v. Kennedy, is working its way through the courts. The plaintiffs argue that the federal government cannot require states to provide disability services in the community rather than in institutions. Then, in June, the Department of Justice (DOJ), which enforces the integration mandate, issued a legal opinion taking a similar position — essentially aligning itself with the plaintiffs in the case. "Congress has not imposed an integration mandate on states," the memo reads. It goes on to say the Olmstead decision "held only that a state cannot institutionalize such patients without justification. … What counts as adequate justification remains an open question." In July, the DOJ also clarified that it would no longer enforce Olmstead in the same way it had in the past.

Ending the Subminimum Wage Does Not Have Adverse Employment Effects

 Michelle Yin, Regina Seo, Hoa Vu, The labor market effects of subminimum wage elimination: Evidence from a national analysis, Labour Economics, Volume 100, 2026, 102884, ISSN 0927-5371, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2026.102884.

Highlights

• First national quasi-experimental analysis of subminimum wage elimination for PWD.
• Elimination reduced 14(c) employment by around 2000 workers per state within two years.
• No significant reductions in overall employment, hours worked, or wages for PWD.
• Reduced welfare receipt suggests elimination promotes economic self-sufficiency.
• Results support federal phase-out of Section 14(c) without adverse employment effects.

Abstract

This study examines the labor market effects of eliminating Section 14(c) subminimum wage employment laws for people with disabilities in the United States. We construct a novel panel dataset combining the universe of Department of Labor Section 14(c) administrative records (2015–2024) with individual-level data from the Current Population Survey (2009–2024). Exploiting the staggered elimination of Section 14(c) across fifteen states, we employ event-study and difference-in-differences designs to identify dynamic treatment effects. We find that elimination policies reduce formal subminimum wage employment by approximately 2000 workers per state within two years. Importantly, we find no statistically significant reductions in overall employment rates, competitive integrated employment, or hours worked among workers with disabilities. Estimates suggest economically meaningful reductions in welfare income receipt. These findings indicate that subminimum wage abolition achieves its intended policy objective by eliminating formal sheltered employment without imposing the adverse employment effects that critics of minimum wage policies predict. Our results inform ongoing federal deliberations over phasing out the Section 14(c) program.

Medicaid Cuts and Home Care

The Politics of Autism includes an extensive discussion of insurance and Medicaid services for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.  Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS) are particularly important. 

 O. Rose Broderick at STAT:

Thousands of family caregivers of people with intellectual and development disabilities in Maryland are facing a grim future after the Maryland Department of Health’s Developmental Disabilities Administration proposed steep cuts to their wages earlier this summer. Some caregivers are looking at $20 per hour pay cuts. The new wage tables were slated to go into effect July 1, but pushback from disability advocates delayed the changes to October. They say the cuts will force families to make an impossible choice between going bankrupt and institutionalizing their loved ones in facilities that often face higher rates of abuse and neglect.
...
Maryland is not an isolated case. Idaho, Indiana, Missouri and Colorado have all introduced proposals in 2026 that would dramatically slash pay for family caregivers and community care. Ohio legislators even proposed banning family members from being certified caregivers before ultimately dropping the measure. These states’ moves are a sign of the deadline looming over state health departments as the $1 trillion Medicaid funding cut tucked in the 2025 GOP-backed tax bill goes into effect Jan. 1, 2027.

...

“We know from the past that whenever the federal government reduces Medicaid, almost every state has made cuts to home and community-based services, and that those optional services include paying family caregivers,” said Kim Musheno, senior director of Medicaid policy at The Arc, a national nonprofit that advocates for people with developmental and intellectual disabilities.

Soon after President Trump started his second term and discussed cutting Medicaid funds, disability advocates raised the alarm that home and community-based services probably would feel the brunt of those cuts, since the care is not mandatory. Since then, the Trump administration has targeted family caregivers, with health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. saying in April that Medicaid-funded programs that pay family caregivers are “rife with fraud” and that those caregivers are doing tasks they used to do for free.

Inclusion Increases

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Government Accountability Office, Special Education: More Students with Disabilities Were Educated in General Education Settings, but State Trends Varied Widely. GAO-26-107814 Published: Jul 02, 2026.

Under federal special education law, students with disabilities are to be educated alongside their peers without disabilities to the maximum extent appropriate. Nationally, the number of students with disabilities in the general education classroom (gen ed) for at least 40 percent of their day increased 25 percent from school year 2012–13 through school year 2023–24 (see figure). The largest increase came from students with disabilities in gen ed for at least 80 percent of their day. The total number of students with disabilities increased 21 percent during this period. GAO also found the share of students with disabilities in gen ed for much of their day increased in 42 of 50 states and the District of Columbia (no data were available for New Mexico for school year 2023–24). However, within states, changes over this period varied widely. For example, the District of Columbia had the largest increase (7.7 percentage points), while in North Dakota the share of students with disabilities in gen ed for at least 40 percent of their day decreased by 3.2 percentage points.

Senator Darline Graham

 In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the congressional role in the issue.

Sara Luterman at The 19th:

Unlike her late brother Lindsey, whose political career spanned 33 years, Darline Graham has never run for or held elected office — until she was appointed to serve the remainder of the U.S. senator’s term this week. Instead, she has worked in vocational rehabilitation, publicly funded programs that help people with disabilities overcome barriers to employment.

Due to her lack of political experience, it is difficult to know what her priorities will be between now and January 2027, when Lindsey Graham’s term ends. But to former colleagues and the disability advocates who have worked with her, there is little doubt in Darline Graham’s capabilities. They describe the 62-year-old as a dedicated civil servant who is uninterested in the spotlight and deeply knowledgeable about issues facing the disability community. And they are optimistic she will bring that experience to Capitol Hill.

Terry Collins; Bella Carpentier, and Thao Nguyen at USA TODAY:

She earned a bachelor's degree in sociology from the College of Charleston, a master's degree in rehabilitation counseling and holds certification as a public manager, according to a biography provided to The Greenville News, part of the USA TODAY Network.

For nearly seven years, she has served as a commissioner of the South Carolina Commission for the Blind, where she focused on helping blind and low-vision people achieve employment, independence and economic self-sufficiency, the biography states.

Graham Nordone began her career as a certified optician, working directly with people on eye-care needs before moving into state government. She later held positions at Clemson University and with the state employment department before joining the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation Department.

During 12 years with the Vocational Rehabilitation Department, Graham Nordone served as the business services director and communications director, according to the biography. She currently serves on the South Carolina State Workforce Development Board and is president-elect of the National Council of State Agencies for the Blind.

Kaine Proposal to Block the Special Education Shift

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of turning it into a block grant, they have tried firing most of the staff who enforce it.   More recently, they have shifted  OSERS to HHS and OCR to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, headed by a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

Zachary Schermele at  USA TODAY:

As Education Department officials work to quell fears about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s agency having a new role in special education, the Senate is eyeing a bipartisan reproach of the move.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, told USA TODAY he's confident that a measure being voted on this month to block the change will pass out of the Senate's education committee with at least some Republican support.

While the exact details of the legislation aren't definitive yet, he said the plan is to advance an amendment that would shield the Education Department's special ed programs from shifting to the Health and Human Services Department. HHS is led by Kennedy, whose controversial past comments have left the disability rights community on edge since the so-called "interagency agreement" was announced in June. He said during a press conference last year, for instance, that autism "destroys families."

Lilla Ross at SmartBrief:

 “These are not just bureaucratic moves,” said Andrew Marcum, academic director of Disability Studies Programs at the CUNY School of Professional Studies, in an interview. “There are reasons why we have special education within a department of education, and it has to do with many decades of organizing and activism.”

...

“The reason that we stopped having the health department oversee education for disabled students is because of the recognition that it’s not a health issue, it’s an educational issue,” Marcum said. “It’s how do we make our classrooms accessible? How do we make our curriculum accessible? How do we make the teaching accessible?”

The concern is not only symbolic. The Education Department’s special education office monitors state compliance with IDEA and helps guide how schools serve students with disabilities. Its civil rights office handles discrimination complaints, including those involving disability access. Moving or splitting that work, advocates say, could make an already difficult system harder for families to navigate.

Marcum said the key questions are practical: who will have the expertise to oversee schools, how states will be held accountable and what happens to families seeking help when services are denied.

Moving Special Ed: Failure of Reassurance

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of turning it into a block grant, they have tried firing most of the staff who enforce it.   More recently, they have shifted  OSERS to HHS and OCR to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, headed by a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

Jonaki Mehta at NPR:

In a call with disability rights advocates Thursday, officials from the U.S. Department of Education tried to ease concerns about plans to move the agency's special education offices to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

"Today's briefing left more questions than answers for parents and educators," says Chad Rummel, who leads the Council for Exceptional Children, and was one of many disability advocates who attended the call. "Today we heard that there is no clear and transparent plan around the move to HHS."

According to a recording of the call obtained by NPR, the acting assistant secretary overseeing special education, Kelly Rogers, said she wanted to reassure advocates that the move would not harm federal protections for students with disabilities. "The U.S. Health and Human Services is not taking over IDEA. Period." Rogers was referring to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a federal law that guarantees students with disabilities a quality public education alongside their nondisabled peers.

Yet Rogers also said in the same breath that staff at the Office for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) — many of the people actually responsible for supporting states and schools in implementing IDEA — would be moving to HHS. She said she would continue to oversee that staff from her perch at the Education Department "with additional support by HHS."

While department officials have been pitching this move as a way to streamline federal bureaucracy in education, advocates think it is doing the opposite. "This proposal appears to add another layer of bureaucracy while creating additional confusion and uncertainty for families, educators, and state agencies," says Denise Marshall, CEO of the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA).
...

"The administration acknowledged today what the law has always required: The Department of Education and the secretary of education remain legally responsible for administering and enforcing IDEA. This reorganization neither advances the stated goal of closing the department nor transfers new authority to the states," says Marshall of COPAA. She called on Congress to step in and stop this move — a federal agency can only be completely dissolved by an act of Congress.

But as Marshall and other advocates pointed out, administration officials seem keenly aware of this fact, which may be why the Education Department is keeping some staff, including Rogers, at the Education Department.

Marshall called the strategy "a sham."

Falling Short on IDEA Part B

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

 Kara Arundel at K-12 Dive:

• More than half of U.S. states and territories did not meet annual targets for implementing federal special education services for students with disabilities ages 3-21, according to a summary of the state determinations issued June 18 by the U.S. Department of Education.
• The latest annual state determinations for implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act also found that only 22 states meet the law’s implementation requirements and improvement efforts for early intervention services to infants and toddlers with disabilities and developmental delays.
• As schools experience both an uptick in the number of students with disabilities qualifying for special education services and a special educator shortage, the IDEA state and district accountability system play an important role in ensuring schools are meeting students’ needs.

From the departmental summary:

MEETS REQUIREMENTS Alabama Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut Missouri Republic of Marshall Islands Florida Nebraska South Dakota Illinois New Hampshire Texas Indiana New Jersey Virginia Kansas Ohio Wisconsin Kentucky Pennsylvania Wyoming 

NEEDS ASSISTANCE (one year) Maryland Minnesota North Dakota 

NEEDS ASSISTANCE (two or more consecutive years) Alaska Georgia Oklahoma American Samoa Guam Oregon Arkansas Hawaii Republic of Palau Arizona Idaho Puerto Rico California Iowa South Carolina Colorado Louisiana Tennessee Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Michigan Utah Mississippi Virgin Islands Delaware Montana Washington Federated States of Micronesia Nevada West Virginia North Carolina

NEEDS INTERVENTION Bureau of Indian Education New Mexico New York District of Columbia Vermont Maine

HHS, DOJ, and IDEA

 In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of turning it into a block grant, they have tried firing most of the staff who enforce it.   More recently, they have shifted  OSERS to HHS and OCR to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, headed by a political hack who uses the r-word as a slur.

Jerell Hill, dean of student services at Los Angeles City College, at Education Week:

On June 16, the U.S. Department of Education announced agreements moving special education oversight to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and shifting civil rights enforcement to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Education Department officials moved quickly to reassure families: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act still stands. Individualized education programs will continue. The right to a free, appropriate public education remains intact.

I spent years as a regional director of special education. I know what oversight actually does and I know why “nothing will change” is the wrong thing to celebrate.

Oversight is the bridge between a right written on paper and a child’s ordinary Tuesday. The monitoring visits, the annual performance determinations, the technical assistance, the accountability no parent ever sees: That machinery is how a federal guarantee first enshrined in 1975 becomes an education for a real student today. When it works, a family never has to think about it. When it fails, a child loses a year they do not get back.

So, the question is not whether the law survives this reorganization. The question is what happens to the meaning underneath the law when the file moves between federal agencies and the complaint routes through a courtroom.

Here is my worry, and it is not a partisan one. Housing special education inside HHS invites a subtle reframing. It nudges us toward seeing a child as a diagnosis to manage rather than a learner whose potential the system exists to develop. Special education was won as an educational right. We can’t allow it to be redefined as a medical service.

Bianca Quilantan at POLITICO:

“The DOJ Civil Rights Division’s [Educational Opportunities] Section has lost most of its attorneys under this administration because the department made it clear that it was not interested in doing the traditional work the section had done combating discrimination in education,” said Stacey Young, a former DOJ Civil Division senior attorney who leads Justice Connection, a group of former department employees advocating against the Trump administration’s changes to the agency.

...

Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights, has said her agency will no longer be just the endpoint for the process.

“We’re taking it all in-house for the Department of Education, and doing that work for them, from soup to nuts,” she told “The Glenn Beck Program.”“Of course, they have the ultimate authority at the end of the day by statute, but 99 percent of the work is going to be done here.”

But advocates have expressed concerns that the DOJ has typically been very selective about what cases it takes up and that many complaints could fall through the cracks.

“OCR receives thousands of complaints of discrimination a year and they have the resources to better handle that volume of incoming complaints,” Young said. “DOJ just doesn’t have the same capacity. They don’t have enough lawyers and investigators, and that’s not what the lawyers and investigators they do have are trained to do.”

 

Stephen Miller Behind the Snake Pit Memo

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss court cases involving the civil rights of people with autism and other disabilities. 

Last week, the Department of Justice quietly released a memo pertaining to the landmark 1999 disability civil rights case Olmstead v. L.C.  That precedent, the  memo claimed without evidence, increases homelessness.

Ben Penn and Celine Castronuovo at Bloomberg Law:

White House adviser Stephen Miller was the driving force behind the Justice Department’s recent memo authorizing states to institutionalize people with disabilities rather than fund community-based care, said people briefed on the situation.

Miller, the president’s powerful deputy chief of staff, was frustrated that the department’s Civil Rights Division was still reaching settlements compelling states to transfer those experiencing mental illness out of institutions, added the individuals, who spoke anonymously out of fear of retaliation.

They said Miller felt DOJ’s agreements—including one reached with South Carolina in December—would increase homelessness and didn’t adhere to President Donald Trump’s July executive order pressuring cities and states to move homeless people into treatment centers.

The June 18 DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion concluded states may disregard decades of Supreme Court precedent and ensuing regulations mandating integration of individuals with disabilities into home or community settings.

Spokespeople for both the White House and DOJ denied Miller played a role in the memo.
...
There is no evidence cited in the opinion demonstrating the rise in homelessness was caused by the Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in Olmstead v. L.C. holding that the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits unjustified segregation of individuals with disabilities. In a recent case study, Brandeis University researchers highlighted how states have used their Olmstead settlements to reduce housing costs for low-income people with disabilities.

Lawsuit Against the Administration

In The Politics of Autism, I write about social services, special education, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 

Project 2025 proposed to turn IDEA into a "no strings" block grant, effectively gutting the law and destroying protections that disability families have long relied upon. During the 2024 race, Trump denied any connection to the project, but now he proclaims it, praising OMB director Russ Vought "of Project 2025 fame."

Trump and Vought are now accomplishing their goal of ravaging the law. Instead of shifting it to a block grant, they have tried firing most of the staff who enforce it. 

A June 9 release from California Attorney General Ron Bonta:

California Attorney General Rob Bonta today led a multistate lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) discontinuation of awarded grants under the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG) program. These competitive grants provide critical funding for the professional development of special education staff and support services for children with disabilities. In California, more than 880,000 students are eligible for special education services. Although the California Department of Education (CDE) had been awarded a five-year SPDG grant in 2022, the Department discontinued the grant in September 2025 because of conclusory, baseless concerns about equity-related initiatives. In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition urge the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to find the discontinuation of funds unlawful and emphasize the harmful impact of the discontinuation on essential resources for schools, educators, and parents that support students with disabilities.

“It is disgraceful that President Trump has disregarded the needs of students with disabilities, claiming that supporting their needs is not in the best interest of the federal government. The Trump Administration discontinued critical grants designed to improve outcomes for students with disabilities by building the capacity of educators, administrators, and systems to ensure timely appropriate services and navigate early intervention,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This harmful and unlawful action denies vulnerable students the resources they need to learn and succeed. California is fighting to ensure the continuation of the grant that supports these necessary initiatives for special education.”

The SPDG program was established in 2004 through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to improve long-term outcomes for vulnerable populations. For decades, the Department administered the SPDG program in a routine and predictable manner by publishing a notice inviting applications and identifying relevant priorities that had been subject to notice and comment. After providing an initial award, the Department determines whether the grant should continue for the following year based on enumerated performance and financial metrics. In 2022, CDE applied for and received a five-year SPDG award to implement critical reforms to California’s personnel development in early intervention, early education, and transitional services to improve results for young children with disabilities or at risk for developmental delays. In total, the grant would have provided CDE with $2.1 million per year, a total of $10.5 million over the five-year term, of which it only received funding for three budget periods. During the funded period, California successfully met all program goals and performance requirements and timely submitted all required performance and financial reports.

Nevertheless, in January 2025, President Trump abruptly departed from this settled practice and called for the review and termination of federal grants that funded equity-related initiatives. In September 2025, the Department sent CDE a notice that stated it was discontinuing the funding in its entirety based on vague claims that the programs were not “in the best interest of the Federal Government.” After the discontinuation, CDE’s Request for Reconsideration was summarily denied.

In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that the Department’s discontinuation of funding violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it was contrary to law, without observance of procedure required by law, and arbitrary and capricious. The discontinuations also violated the Spending Clause of the United States Constitution. More specifically, the Department acted unlawfully because, among other reasons:

• It relied on unpublished new priorities that had not been subject to the notice-and-comment procedures required by the General Education Provisions Act, the Department’s own regulations, and the APA.
• It misapplied the continuation regulation by treating the “best interest” provision as allowing them to have unlimited discretion to discontinue grants based on new priorities.
• It changed its position and misled the states by first requiring their applications to highlight equity initiatives and then penalizing them for the very same initiatives, and by failing to consider extensive reliance interests.
• It failed to provide the kind of “reasoned explanation” required by the APA and instead relied on conclusory language.

In filing the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta is leading the attorneys general of Rhode Island and Wisconsin.