Picture of a rally in front of the U.S. Capitol with someone holding a "Protect Medicaid" sign

California and Minnesota Medicaid Deferrals: What’s at Stake for People With Disabilities

/in /by The Arc

The Arc responds to more than $1 billion in federal Medicaid payment deferrals and calls for fraud oversight that protects continuity of care, disability services, and community living.

On July 21, 2026, HHS and CMS paused more than $1 billion in Medicaid payments to California and Minnesota citing the existence of fraud but without providing specific evidence of alleged fraud. This action threatens access to healthcare and community support needed by people with disabilities. The Arc of the United States is concerned that broad payment actions and sweeping fraud narratives are taking too broad an approach. The federal government’s actions limit Medicaid services for people with disabilities and their families and demonstrate a lack of understanding of what people with disabilities want: a life in the community, with as much independence as possible.

People with disabilities must be at the center of decisions about Medicaid, not treated as collateral damage in efforts to strengthen program integrity.

Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States, responds:

“The federal government’s actions are troubling because the goal should be to stop fraud while protecting continuity of care for those who need it. We hear from people every day who are scared and uncertain because they don’t know if their healthcare and services will continue. When conversations begin and end with fraud allegations, people lose sight of what Medicaid actually does and who depends on it. Medicaid helps people with disabilities get out of bed in the morning, attend school, get into the workforce, and be a part of their community. It helps families balance the need to care for their loved one with daily, intense support needs, while they work to put food on the table and care for the whole family. And it provides millions of people access to health insurance. Strong oversight to weed out fraudulent activities and a strong service delivery program are not competing goals. We can and must do both.”

For Reporters

Katy Neas is available for interviews about Medicaid, home and community-based services (HCBS), and how federal and state Medicaid policy affects people with disabilities and their families. For media inquiries or to request an interview, contact dilworth@thearc.org.

A diverse classroom with a teacher sitting on the floor next to two students, who are looking at a workbook.

The Ultimate Back-To-School Guide for Families of Children With Disabilities

/in /by The Arc

Written by: Robyn Linscott, Director of Education & Family Policy and Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States

The start of a new school year can bring excitement, but for parents and caregivers of children with disabilities, back-to-school preparation often includes much more than supply lists and first-day nerves. You may be reviewing an IEP or 504 plan, making sure services and accommodations are ready, preparing your child for a change in routine, and figuring out how to work with a new team at school.

Recent changes to how the U.S. Department of Education oversees special education and civil rights protections have also left many families wondering what, if anything, will be different for their child this year. We break down what those changes actually mean, and don’t mean, for your family’s rights in our explainer on moving special education oversight out of the Department of Education.

The short version: the laws that protect your child, including the right to a free appropriate public education, haven’t changed. But given the shifting federal landscape, it’s more important than ever to start conversations with your child’s school early and keep having them all year long.

Most back-to-school checklists assume a fairly uniform experience: the same supply list, the same first-day jitters. Families of children with disabilities are often left to figure out the rest on their own. This guide is for you.

Before the School Year Starts

How Can I Prepare My Child With a Disability for a New School Year?

Have a real conversation with your child about what’s coming. What are they excited about? What’s making them nervous? Use it to set clear, honest expectations. A visual calendar you build together to mark the first day, picture day, breaks, and other milestones can make the transition feel more predictable and less abstract, especially for kids who rely on routine and visual supports.

How Can I Help My Child With a Disability Adjust to a New School Routine?

Don’t flip the switch overnight. Start rebuilding a consistent before- and after-school routine a couple of weeks out, whatever that looks like for your child: a calm morning routine, dedicated homework space, predictable bedtime wind-down, etc. Keep weekend plans light for the first few weeks so your child has room to decompress instead of starting each week already worn out.

Should I Review My Child’s IEP or 504 Plan Before School Starts?

Before the first bell rings, sit down with your child’s IEP or 504 plan and read it thoroughly. Know every goal, every accommodation, every related service, and every deadline in it. If anything has changed since the last meeting (i.e. new needs, a new diagnosis, assistive technology that could help) request an IEP or 504 review meeting now, before small issues turn into bigger ones once the year is underway.

If you’re not sure which document applies to your child, or why, you’re not alone. It’s one of the most common points of confusion for families, and most back-to-school advice skips it entirely. In short: an Individualized Education Program (IEP) is a legal document under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that provides specialized instruction and services for children who qualify. A 504 plan, under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, provides accommodations for children who don’t need specialized instruction but do need a level playing field.

We break down IEPs in detail in our IEP rights guide, and Parents.com has a helpful explainer on 504 plans that includes input from The Arc’s policy team: Everything Parents Need to Know About 504 Plans.

Keep a running record of everything: your child’s progress, setbacks, and any communication with the school. It becomes invaluable at the next meeting and for tracking growth over time.

How Can I Build a Strong Relationship With My Child’s Special Education Team?

Reach out to your child’s teachers and service providers before school starts. Share what you know: your child’s strengths, interests, and what you’re hoping for this year. Agree on a communication plan that works for all of you, whether that’s a weekly email, shared log, or something else that keeps everyone on the same page.

It’s also okay to be direct. If the federal changes to special education oversight have you uneasy, say so. Ask your child’s school outright: what is your plan to make sure nothing changes for my child this year? A good school will have an answer. If your child is starting at a new school, ask for a tour ahead of time and start planning the transition with both schools early. If they’re in a before- or after-care program, build a relationship with that staff too. They’re part of your child’s day even when they’re not in the classroom.

Once School Starts

How Can I Help My Child With a Disability Build Self-Advocacy Skills?

Teach your child developmentally appropriate ways to advocate for themselves: asking for a break when they’re overwhelmed, asking a teacher to repeat instructions, sharing what they need in the moment. These are skills they’ll use well beyond this school year.

What Should I Do If My Child With a Disability Isn’t Getting the Support They Need at School?

The first few weeks are rarely smooth for anyone. Give your child and their teachers room to find their groove. But keep watching closely, and if something isn’t working, don’t wait it out. A quick, respectful conversation in week two is a lot easier than a crisis meeting in month three.

Recognize Your Child’s Progress, Not Just the Problems

Notice the effort, not just the outcome, such as a good week, new friendship, proactive or creative school work, or hard morning handled well. Naming it out loud builds the kind of confidence that carries a child through a harder day later on.

Finding Support and Understanding Your Rights

Where Can Families of Children With Disabilities Find Support and Help with School Issues?

You don’t have to figure this out solo. Your state’s Developmental Disabilities Council, your local chapter of The Arc, and inclusive extracurricular activities in your community can connect you with other families living the same challenges right now, people who’ve likely already found the workaround you’re looking for.

What Special Education Rights Should Parents Know at the Start of the School Year?

Under IDEA, your child has a federal legal right to a free appropriate public education, tailored to their needs. That right doesn’t depend on which federal agency is overseeing it, and it doesn’t disappear because of policy changes in Washington, DC. If you’re ever unsure whether your child is getting what they’re legally entitled to, The Arc@School was built exactly for this: plain-language guidance on your rights and real support finding your footing when something feels off. Knowing your rights here is the foundation everything else on this list depends on.

Your well-being is part of this, too. A quiet hour with a book, call with a friend, or even five minutes of scrolling isn’t indulgent. It’s what keeps you steady enough to show up for your child the other 23 hours of the day.

You’re not doing this alone. We’re here for every step of it. Here’s to a strong start to the year.

More Back-to-School and Special Education Resources for Families of Children With Disabilities

Common Back-to-School Questions Families of Children With Disabilities

What should I check before my child with a disability starts school?

Confirm transportation, health needs, accessibility, and who to contact if something goes wrong. If your child has an IEP or 504 plan, review the supports that should be ready on day one.

What should I tell my child’s teacher about their disability?

Share what helps your child learn, communicate, manage sensory needs, and feel supported. Focus on useful information about your child as a person, not just their diagnosis.

How can I ease the school transition for my child with a disability?

Make the new routine as predictable as possible. Practice key parts ahead of time, use visual or communication supports that work for your child, and leave space to decompress after school.

What if my child’s disability supports aren’t ready?

Contact the school team early and be specific about what is missing. Keep a written record, and use our IEP rights guide if you need more information about your child’s legal rights and next steps.

A man in a wheelchair sits at a desk at home, reviewing paperwork next to an open laptop.

New Medicaid Work Rules: What People With Disabilities and Families Should Know

/in /by The Arc

What is happening with Medicaid right now?

Last year, Congress passed a new Medicaid law.

The law created new community engagement rules (often called work requirements) for some adults who get Medicaid.

It impacts all but 7 states: Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Wyoming.

Work requirements say some adults may have to work, go to school, volunteer, or do another approved activity to keep Medicaid.

For most states, the work requirements will begin on January 1, 2027.

Why does federal changes to Medicaid matter?

Medicaid helps people with disabilities get healthcare and daily support.

Medicaid can pay for:

  • Doctor visits
  • Medicine
  • Therapy
  • Mental health care
  • Personal care services
  • Help at home
  • Support to live in the community
  • Help finding and keeping a job

Losing Medicaid for even a short time can mean losing important care and support.

What do Medicaid’s new work rules mean for people with disabilities?

Many people with disabilities do not have to follow the work requirements.

For example, many people who get Supplemental Security Income (SSI) qualify for an “exemption” and do not have to meet the work requirements.

An exemption means a person does not have to follow the work requirements.

But some people with disabilities may still have to show they qualify for an exemption. This may include:

  • Adults with disabilities who do not get SSI
  • People waiting to learn if they qualify for disability benefits
  • People who lose SSI for a short time because of paperwork problems
  • Young adults with disabilities moving from children’s services to adult services

Some people with disabilities can qualify for an exemption if they are considered “medically frail.”

Medically frail means they have a disability or serious health problem that makes it hard to meet the work requirements.

People who want to qualify for this medically frail exemption may have to show:

  • They have a disability or serious health problem
  • Their disability or health problem makes it hard to meet the work requirements

Some people who qualify for an exemption may still have trouble getting one.

Do family caregivers also qualify for a work exemption under Medicaid?

Some family caregivers may also qualify for an exemption.

This may include parents, guardians, relatives, and other caregivers who regularly help a person with a disability.

Caregivers may still have to show they qualify.

How could paperwork make someone lose Medicaid?

Even people who qualify for an exemption could lose Medicaid if their paperwork is missing, delayed, or filled out incorrectly.

We have seen this happen before. Some people who should have kept their Medicaid lost it because of paperwork problems, not because they no longer qualified.

Why is The Arc concerned about recent changes to Medicaid?

The law was meant to protect people with disabilities and family caregivers from work requirements.

The new rule makes many changes that make it harder for people to show they qualify for an exemption. More people with disabilities may not be protected because of these changes.

People should not lose healthcare because of confusing rules, paperwork problems, or mistakes.

Take action!

The federal government is accepting public comments on this rule until July 31, 2026.

Share your comments and stories through The Arc’s website.

Tell CMS to:

  • Withdraw or pause the rule
  • Make it easier for people with disabilities and serious health problems to qualify for the medically frail exemption
  • Protect people from losing Medicaid because of paperwork problems

Your story can help protect Medicaid and the services people use every day.

A white woman on a city street holding a cardboard protest sign that says "Education for All"

New GAO Report Shows Progress on Inclusion for Students With Disabilities

/in /by Robyn Linscott

More students with disabilities are learning in general education classrooms, but progress remains uneven at a time when federal education oversight is being split across multiple agencies

By: Robyn Linscott, Director of Education and Family Policy, The Arc of the United States

A new GAO report shows that more students with disabilities are learning in general education classrooms than they were a decade ago. But it also shows how uneven that progress is, and why this is the wrong time to split education oversight across multiple agencies.

The number of students with disabilities who spent at least 40% of the school day in general education classrooms increased 25% between the 2012-13 and 2023-24 school years. At the same time, progress varied sharply by state and across disability categories. So while more students with disabilities are learning alongside their peers, access to inclusion still depends too much on where a student lives and which students are being counted in that progress.

That news comes as federal oversight of schools is being split across multiple agencies. In late 2025, the Department of Education began shifting parts of K-12 education work to the Department of Labor. Then in June 2026, it announced plans to move special education oversight to the Department of Health and Human Services and civil rights enforcement to the Department of Justice. That means general education, special education, and civil rights are being handled in different places. That separates students with disabilities from the broader education system, weakens the link between classroom instruction and disability rights, and risks a more fragmented approach to inclusion across the country.

Inclusion is growing, but where a student lives matters

The GAO findings are good news. More students with disabilities are spending a substantial part of the day in general education classrooms, and the biggest increase came among students who spent at least 80% of the day there. That means more students are getting access to general education standards, peers, and the day-to-day life of school.

But that progress still isn’t happening evenly. Inclusion increased in 42 states and the District of Columbia, but the state-by-state differences were stark. The District of Columbia saw the largest increase, while North Dakota saw a decrease.

Are all students with IDD seeing the same gains in inclusion?

The report shows overall progress, but that progress isn’t reaching every group in the same way.

For students with intellectual disability, the number spending at least 40% of the school day in general education rose from 180,492 in 2012-13 to 199,274 in 2023-24. But as a share of the overall student population, that figure actually fell from 3.9% to 3.5%. For students with multiple disabilities, the number also rose, from 36,384 to 42,136, while the share fell from 0.8% to 0.7%. By contrast, for students with autism, both the number and the share increased sharply, from 253,750 to 543,868 and from 5.5% to 9.5%. While schools have gotten better at supporting students with autism in the general education classroom, more work needs to be done to meaningfully include students with intellectual disability and multiple disabilities.

Inclusion is moving in the right direction nationally, but the picture is more uneven for students with IDD. Some students with IDD still aren’t seeing the same gains in access to general education classrooms.

What does inclusion look like beyond classroom placement?

One of the most useful parts of the GAO report is that it goes beyond placement numbers. School officials told GAO that placement decisions are shaped by resources, family involvement, and school environment. They also described the role that relationships, extracurriculars, and school culture play in helping students with disabilities feel part of the school community.

That reinforces what we already know: a student can be in a general education classroom and still not be meaningfully included. Real inclusion means being part of the class, part of the school, and part of the opportunities that make up school life.

Why is now the wrong time to weaken federal special education oversight?

Students with disabilities need one education system that can connect classroom learning, special education supports, and civil rights protections. When those responsibilities are spread across different agencies, it becomes harder to give schools clear guidance, harder to hold states accountable, and harder for families to get answers when something goes wrong. A child who’s denied services, pushed out of the classroom, or excluded from school life shouldn’t have to navigate a maze of agencies to get help.

It also pushes disability further away from education itself. The Arc has already warned that moving IDEA oversight into HHS risks treating disability more as a health or services issue than as part of a student’s experience in school. That’s the wrong approach. Students with disabilities are students first, and their rights belong in the education system.

The timing makes this even more concerning. The Department of Education’s latest IDEA determinations show that only 20 states met requirements for serving students with disabilities. When so many states are still falling short, the answer should be stronger oversight and clearer accountability, not moving special education farther away from the education system.

We can’t afford to backslide on this progress

Inclusion is increasing nationally, and that’s worth recognizing. But the gains are uneven, which is why strong federal oversight still matters. This is not the time to move special education farther away from the rest of education. It’s not the time to split classrooms, disability rights, and school accountability across different agencies. And it’s not the time to accept a system where inclusion still varies too widely by state and where some disability groups still are not seeing the same gains. We’ve made progress, and now we need to protect it.

A man with disabilities stands indoors at a busy event space holding a sign that reads “I’M VOTING BECAUSE… it’s my voice!” The sign has The Arc logo in the top left and the hashtag #REVUP in the bottom right.

Supreme Court Protects Mail Voting in Major Win for Voters With Disabilities

/in /by Jackie Dilworth

In Watson v. Republican National Committee, the Court upheld Mississippi’s law allowing ballots postmarked by Election Day to count if they arrive shortly afterward.

In a 5-4 decision on June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Mississippi’s law allowing mail ballots postmarked by Election Day and received up to five days later to be counted. For many voters with disabilities, this is a major protection for the right to vote. Many voters with disabilities rely on mail voting because in-person voting can come with real barriers, including inaccessible transportation, inaccessible polling places, and long lines. By rejecting a challenge that could have threatened similar laws in other states, the Court preserved an important path to the ballot box for voters with disabilities.

“For many voters with disabilities, mail voting is an essential way to participate in elections,” said Shira Wakschlag, Senior Executive Officer of Legal Advocacy and General Counsel for The Arc of the United States. “Too many disabled voters already face barriers at every step of the process, from getting to the polls to accessing a ballot and having it counted. This decision helps protect an important voting option that many people with disabilities rely on. That matters because election outcomes shape the systems, supports, and rights many people with disabilities depend on every day.”

What is Watson v. Republican National Committee about?

This case asked whether federal law allows states to count mail ballots that are postmarked on or before Election Day but arrive after Election Day.

Mississippi is one of roughly 30 states that count mailed ballots sent by Election Day but arrive shortly afterward. That made this case much bigger than one state. If the challengers had won, the ruling could have put similar ballot receipt rules at risk across the country, including rules that help many voters with disabilities cast a ballot that counts.

What happened in Watson v. Republican National Committee?

In 2024, the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and two individual plaintiffs sued Mississippi election officials, arguing that federal law requires ballots in federal elections to be received by Election Day, not just mailed by then.

A federal district court rejected that argument and upheld Mississippi’s law. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision, concluding that Mississippi’s ballot receipt rule conflicted with federal election-day statutes. Mississippi then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Court agreed to hear the case.

What did the Supreme Court decide in Watson v. Republican National Committee?

The Supreme Court upheld Mississippi’s law. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The Court held that federal election-day statutes don’t require ballots to be received by Election Day. Instead, those statutes set the day votes must be cast. States remain free to decide when timely mailed ballots must be received.

The Court emphasized that the question before it was narrow. It wasn’t deciding whether absentee voting is lawful or whether votes may be counted after Election Day. It was deciding whether federal law blocks states from counting ballots that were cast on time but arrived later. The answer was no. The Court also pointed to federal law protecting military and overseas voters as further evidence that state law controls ballot receipt deadlines.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. He argued that ballots must be received by Election Day to be counted in federal elections.

Why The Arc supports accessible vote-by-mail options for voters with disabilities

The Arc’s position is clear: people with disabilities have the same right to vote as everyone else, and they have the right to the accommodations, assistance, and supports they need to exercise that right. You can read more in our position statement on human and civil rights.

Voting by mail is an important and accessible option for millions of voters with disabilities across the country. A U.S. Election Assistance Commission study found that close to three-fifths of voters with disabilities voted with a mail ballot or early in person in 2022, compared with just over half of voters without disabilities. The same study found that voting difficulties were still much higher for voters with disabilities than for voters without disabilities.

That’s why efforts to make mail voting harder can hit voters with disabilities especially hard. If a voter follows the rules and mails a ballot on time, that ballot should count. Voters with disabilities shouldn’t lose their vote because of postal delays that are outside their control.

Why does the Watson v. Republican National Committee case matter for people with disabilities?

This decision matters because voters with disabilities disproportionately rely on mail voting to participate in elections. If the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the other way, some voters with disabilities could have lost their vote even after doing everything right.

It also matters because this ruling recognizes a simple point: casting a ballot and receiving a ballot aren’t the same thing. For voters who depend on mail voting, that distinction can determine whether their vote counts. The Court’s decision preserved a rule that helps protect disabled voters from being disenfranchised by delays they cannot control.

At the same time, this ruling isn’t the end of the work. Accessible democracy requires more than one voting method. States should make both mail voting and in-person voting fully accessible so that no eligible voter is pushed out of the democratic process.

Where can I learn more about Watson v. Republican National Committee?

Watson v. Republican National Committee FAQ: Mail Ballots and Disability Voting Rights

Can states count mail ballots that arrive after Election Day if they were mailed on time?

Yes. In Watson v. Republican National Committee, the Supreme Court ruled that federal law does not require mail ballots to be received by Election Day. States can count ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and arrive shortly afterward if state law allows it.

What did the Supreme Court decide in Watson v. Republican National Committee?

The Court upheld Mississippi’s law allowing mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they are received up to five business days later.

Why does the Watson v. Republican National Committee ruling matter for voters with disabilities?

It matters because many voters with disabilities rely on mail voting, and rejecting ballots that were mailed on time could disenfranchise them. A national Election Assistance Commission study found that voters with disabilities were more likely than voters without disabilities to vote by mail or early in person in 2022.

Could the Watson v. Republican National Committee decision affect mail ballot rules outside Mississippi?

Yes. The Supreme Court noted that Mississippi is one of roughly 30 states that count at least some absentee ballots mailed by Election Day and received afterward, so the ruling could matter well beyond Mississippi.

Group picture of people with disabilities and other advocates after attending a Medicaid work requirements hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC

How Ohio Families Defended Medicaid Support for Family Caregivers

/in /by The Arc

Around the country, everyday families are piecing together caregiving because they have no other choice. Some states have found ways to support family caregivers in ways that make it work for people with disabilities, their loved ones, and the care system.

In a structured program, monitored by the state Medicaid agency, some family caregivers are paid a modest amount to support their loved one. It gives the person with a disability a reliable and familiar caregiver, and it takes some pressure of families juggling all aspects of their lives – work, family, caregiving, and more.

But when Ohio lawmakers prepared to vote on legislation that would prohibit family members from being paid through Medicaid programs, disability advocates and families mobilized immediately.

Family Caregivers Are the Backbone of America’s Care System

Family caregivers are already doing the work that keeps America’s long term care system functioning.

According to a recent AARP report, family caregivers now provide more than $1 trillion worth of care each year in the United States. Nearly 59 million Americans care for aging parents, spouses, children with disabilities, neighbors, and other loved ones, contributing an estimated 49.5 billion hours of care annually. If that care were compensated at market rates, it would be valued at approximately $1.01 trillion every year.

Most of this work is unpaid. 

Family caregivers help loved ones bathe, dress, prepare meals, manage medications, attend medical appointments, and increasingly perform complex medical and nursing tasks that were once provided in institutional settings.

More than half of family caregivers now provide high intensity care, averaging 27 hours of caregiving each week. The 49.5 billion hours of care they provide annually is equivalent to nearly 24 million full-time workers, roughly 17 percent of the entire U.S. workforce.

This caregiving work is not optional.

Ohio, like many states, faces a severe direct care workforce shortage.

Providers frequently struggle to fill authorized care hours, leaving families to step in and provide support that Medicaid cannot otherwise deliver. Without family caregivers, many people would go without critical assistance with daily activities, medication management, transportation, and personal care.

Without these caregivers, millions more Americans would rely on expensive institutional care, dramatically increasing costs for taxpayers. In fact, the economic value of family caregiving now exceeds total federal, state, and local Medicaid spending nationwide.

Ohio’s Disability Community Mobilized Quickly

The proposal moved quickly, but so did Ohio’s disability community.

The Arc of Ohio, self-advocates, family caregivers, providers, and aging advocates mobilized rapidly to educate lawmakers about the devastating consequences the proposal would have for people with disabilities and older adults. Committee hearings were packed with people with disabilities, family caregivers, and advocates who shared deeply personal stories about what Medicaid-funded family caregiving makes possible and what would happen if that support disappeared. Wheelchairs lined the hearing room as lawmakers listened to testimony from families who described the realities of navigating a strained care system and the essential role they play in keeping their loved ones safe at home.

The testimony shifted the conversation to the real experiences of Ohio families. Several legislators were visibly moved during the hearings.

Within hours, the proposal to prohibit family caregiver payments had been removed from the bill, demonstrating the power of coordinated advocacy and authentic lived experience.

The Bigger Problem: When Allegations of Fraud Becomes an Excuse to Cut Care

The Ohio debate reflects a troubling national trend.

Across the country, allegations of fraud are increasingly being used to justify greater scrutiny of Medicaid, home and community-based services (HCBS), and family caregiving programs. Program integrity matters and fraud should be rooted out. But in the process, what’s happening around the country now is making it harder for people to access the care they need.

Medicaid and other safety net programs are already subject to extensive federal and state oversight, and the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries, family caregivers, and providers follow the rules. Yet fraud narratives increasingly cast suspicion on family caregivers and community-based providers who fill critical gaps in an already strained care system.

These attacks go beyond program integrity. They devalue caregiving, undermine the rights of people with disabilities to receive services at home, and threaten a care infrastructure that depends on family caregivers, whose unpaid contributions exceed $1 trillion annually.

What’s Next and How You Can Help

Advocates in Ohio prevailed. Following overwhelming opposition from people with disabilities, families, and advocates, the proposal to eliminate Medicaid waiver payments for family caregivers was removed from the legislation moving forward.

This victory was built on decades of advocacy by self-advocates, family members, disability rights organizations, and The Arc’s network.

Right now, The Arc of the United States and our chapters are pushing back against threats to Medicaid, HCBS, and other programs that make community living possible. And those threats are coming from many avenues.

You can help by:

An Asian woman with short hair is helping a young Black girl color a picture on a green and yellow desk

Broad Coalition Urges Congress to Keep Special Education and Civil Rights in the Department of Education

/in /by Jackie Dilworth

The Department of Education calls its plan to move special education oversight to Health and Human Services and school civil rights enforcement to the Department of Justice a “partnership.” Disability, civil rights, education, parent, and educator organizations see something very different: core education and civil rights responsibilities being moved away from the agency Congress charged with protecting them.

The Arc of the United States joined a broad coalition urging Congress to reject these transfers and keep special education, Section 504 enforcement, vocational rehabilitation, and school civil rights protections connected inside the Department of Education. Read The Arc’s full statement on what this move could mean for students with disabilities, families, schools, and civil rights enforcement.

Download the Coalition Letter

Full Coalition Letter

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 18, 2026

Broad Coalition of Disability, Civil Rights, and Education Organizations Denounces ED’s Latest Transfers of Core Functions

Washington, D.C. — The undersigned disability, civil rights, and education organizations strongly oppose the Administration’s efforts to transfer the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) from the U.S. Department of Education (ED) to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to the Department of Justice (DOJ) through Interagency Agreements (IAAs). These agreements undermine the core foundation of federal disability, education, and civil rights policy and implementation.

Students with disabilities deserve educational systems that are designed around their needs, rights, and opportunities, not administrative restructuring that risks disrupting critical services and protections. They deserve equitable access to education, robust protections under the law, and an intact Department of Education that is committed to their success and steadfast in defending their rights.

Far too many students experience unacceptable barriers to receiving services and supports – but these transfers do not reflect meaningful solutions to this problem. While ED states that stakeholder input was considered, these IAAs do not reflect the concerns widely expressed by parents, educators, disability organizations, and civil rights advocates. Congress specifically entrusted ED with administering the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), enforcing Section 504 protections in public schools and colleges, overseeing vocational rehabilitation programs, and safeguarding the civil rights of students with disabilities. Congress has repeatedly reauthorized and strengthened these laws within the Department since its establishment in 1979, creating an integrated framework for students with disabilities that connects educational opportunity, civil rights enforcement, transition services, workforce preparation, and employment outcomes.

Transferring OSERS to HHS moves critical education, transition, and employment programs into an agency primarily focused on health care, weakening the coordination between schools, vocational rehabilitation, and postsecondary opportunities. Furthermore, separating OSERS from the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), which funds and oversees K-12 education programs, segregates disability-related education programs from the broader education system and weakens the coordination necessary to ensure students with disabilities are fully included in general education. Special education is not a separate enterprise. IDEA is built on the principle that students with disabilities should be educated alongside their peers and have access to the same academic standards, accountability systems, and opportunities for success. State education leaders and educators⸺including both general and special educators⸺also rely on ED’s expertise, guidance, monitoring, and technical assistance; responsibilities that Congress unilaterally funds and directs the Department to provide.

Likewise, transferring OCR to DOJ separates education-focused civil rights enforcement from the agency responsible for education policy and oversight, exposing students and their families to longer wait times when discrimination is occurring in schools and risking the loss of specialized expertise that students and families rely upon to resolve their complaints and drive necessary improvements in school policy and practice to prevent future discrimination. It will also discourage some families from seeking assistance or filing complaints due to concerns about engaging with a law enforcement agency rather than experts in education and disability law.

Congress intentionally built an education and vocational rehabilitation continuum that supports individuals with disabilities from early intervention through school, postsecondary education, and employment. Moving OSERS to HHS and OCR to DOJ dismantles this coordinated and cohesive approach and threatens decades of progress advancing educational, employment, and civil rights outcomes for students with disabilities.

The undersigned organizations urge Congress to reject these transfers and preserve the Department of Education’s longstanding and Congressionally mandated roles to lead, direct, oversee, administer, and enforce the laws and programs that support opportunity, inclusion, and success for all students with disabilities.

Organizations that Signed the Letter

The letter was signed by a broad coalition of national, state, and local disability, civil rights, education, parent, educator, and community organizations, including The Arc of the United States, ACLU, National Disability Rights Network, Council for Exceptional Children, National Education Association, National Center for Learning Disabilities, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, COPAA, and dozens of state and local groups across the country. Download the full coalition letter to see the complete list of organizations.

A black and white picture of people with disabilities protesting to get Section 504 signed

DOJ Actions on Olmstead Threaten the Right of People With Disabilities to Live in the Community

/in , /by Jackie Dilworth

Update (July 20, 2026): The concern we raised in this post is already becoming reality. The Department of Justice has now published a Federal Register notice saying it won’t rely on its longstanding Olmstead guidance when enforcing Title II of the ADA. The notice also says the Olmstead guidance and similar guidance documents are “not enforceable” and that the DOJ plans to revisit the guidance under a narrower reading of federal law. This doesn’t overturn Olmstead, the ADA, Section 504, or the integration mandate, but it’s another serious step away from federal enforcement of community living rights for people with disabilities.

On June 18, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a legal opinion that threatens one of the most important civil rights protections for people with disabilities: the right to live and receive services in the community, not be unnecessarily confined to institutions.

The opinion targets Olmstead v. L.C., the 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized institutional isolation of people with disabilities as discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). For more than 25 years, Olmstead has helped people with disabilities fight for the supports they need to live at home and in their communities.

This guidance isn’t a court decision. It doesn’t erase Olmstead or change Supreme Court precedent. It also doesn’t take away the ADA, Section 504, or the regulations that protect community living.

But it’s dangerous because rights mean less when the federal government refuses to enforce them. This guidance seeks to undermine one of the strongest protections people with disabilities have from being pushed into institutions when they can and want to live in the community. The DOJ itself acknowledges that this opinion is “out of step” with how federal courts have understood Olmstead.

For people with disabilities, this is about whether they can get services at home instead of being forced into a facility. It’s about whether children and adults with disabilities can stay connected to their family, friends, school, work, and community life. It’s about whether people have a meaningful way to protect their rights when a state or system says “no.”

“This guidance is a direct threat to decades of progress toward community living for people with disabilities which has always been at the heart of The Arc’s 75 years of advocacy,” said Shira Wakschlag, Senior Executive Officer of Legal Advocacy and General Counsel at The Arc of the United States. “Olmstead remains the law of the land, but this opinion tells people with disabilities that the federal government seeks to attack one of their most basic civil rights. People with disabilities shouldn’t be forced into institutions because a state refuses to provide services in the community. The Arc will keep fighting to protect Olmstead, Section 504, the ADA, and the right to live in the community.”

This is confusing and upsetting news, but it’s important to understand what has changed and what hasn’t. Here’s what people with disabilities, families, and advocates need to know right now:

  • Olmstead is still Supreme Court precedent
  • The ADA and Section 504 are still law
  • The integration mandate still exists in federal regulations
  • People’s rights have not disappeared
  • The federal government is taking steps to pull back from enforcing key protections for community living
  • People with disabilities and advocates must stay alert, organized, and ready to push back

DOJ Is Now Pulling Back From Olmstead Guidance

On July 20, 2026, the DOJ published a Federal Register notice saying it will no longer rely on its longstanding Olmstead guidance when enforcing Title II of the ADA. That guidance helped explain when states may violate the ADA by unnecessarily segregating people with disabilities or putting them at serious risk of institutionalization.

The DOJ now says the Olmstead guidance and similar guidance documents aren’t enforceable and that they will revisit the guidance under a narrower reading of federal law. Guidance doesn’t create new legal duties by itself. But it matters because it shows how the federal government understands and enforces the law. The DOJ is signaling that people with disabilities may have fewer federal tools to protect their right to live, work, learn, and spend time in the community.

This announcement follows the DOJ’s June opinion and broader attacks on Olmstead, Section 504, the ADA, and the rights and supports people with disabilities rely on.

This isn’t the end of Olmstead. It’s the start of a new fight to protect it.

Disability rights aren’t always weakened through one big repeal. Sometimes they’re weakened through legal memos, withdrawn guidance, reduced enforcement, and regulations that get rolled back. That’s why this opinion and notice matter.

Olmstead began with two women, Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson, who were held in a Georgia state hospital even after professionals said they could live in the community. Their case helped affirm a basic truth: people with disabilities shouldn’t have to live in institutions just to receive services.

For The Arc, this fight isn’t new. Our movement was built by families and people with disabilities who rejected institutionalization and demanded the right to live, learn, work, and belong in the community. Today, that fight continues in courtrooms, in Congress, in federal agencies, in state capitols, and through our 549 chapters across the country.

The DOJ opinion and notice also come as disability rights are being challenged from multiple directions, including lawsuits and policy efforts that seek to weaken Section 504, the ADA, and the integration mandate. The Arc is monitoring these threats closely, including Texas v. Kennedy, and will continue working with legal partners, chapters, and advocates to protect community living from every angle.

Community living is a civil right won by people with disabilities, families, and advocates who fought segregation for generations. People with disabilities belong in their communities, with the services and supports they need to live the lives they choose. The Arc will keep using every tool we have to protect that right.

DOJ Olmstead Opinion FAQ: What It Means for Disability Rights and Community Living

What did the DOJ say in the July 2026 notice on Olmstead guidance?

The DOJ said it will no longer rely on its Olmstead guidance when enforcing Title II of the ADA. The notice also says the guidance isn’t enforceable and that the DOJ plans to revisit it under a narrower view of the law. Olmstead is still the law, but federal enforcement is being pulled back.

Does the DOJ opinion or Federal Register notice overturn Olmstead?

No, their June 2026 opinion or July 2026 Federal Register notice aren’t court decisions. They don’t overturn Olmstead v. L.C. or change Supreme Court precedent. The ADA, Section 504, and the integration mandate still exist. But these signals are dangerous because they say the federal government may stop enforcing one of the strongest protections people with disabilities have against unnecessary institutionalization.

Is Olmstead still the law?

Yes, Olmstead is still the law. For 27 years, it has helped protect the right of people with disabilities to live and receive services in the community instead of being unnecessarily separated in institutions.

What is the integration mandate?

The integration mandate requires services to be provided in the most integrated setting appropriate. It helps protect the right of people with disabilities to live and get services in the community, not be forced into institutions when they can and want to live in the community.

What does the DOJ Olmstead opinion and Federal Register notice mean for people with disabilities?

Right now, people’s rights haven’t disappeared. But the federal government seeks to undermine one of the key protections for community living. That could make it harder for people with disabilities to get help from the federal government when they are denied services at home, pushed toward institutional care, or separated from community life.

Can people with disabilities still bring Olmstead claims?

Yes, people with disabilities can still bring Olmstead claims. The DOJ’s June 2026 opinion or July 2026 Federal Register notice don’t erase the ADA, Section 504, or the right to challenge unnecessary institutionalization. But if the federal government steps back from enforcement, people with disabilities and advocates may have to rely more heavily on private lawsuits, state advocacy, and disability rights organizations to protect these rights.

A photo of advocates in Florida rallying to end the use of the R-word

Why the R-Word Is Still a Slur: History and Harm

/in /by Jackie Dilworth

After The Arc’s recent Teen Vogue op-ed about Euphoria’s repeated use of the R-word, thousands of people responded across social media. Some comments showed gratitude and deep pain. Others showed how many people don’t understand the harm this word carries.

Again and again, people defended the word with some version of: “People are too sensitive,” or “I don’t use it against people with disabilities.”

But those responses don’t change the real issue: the R-word still causes harm, no matter how casually it’s used.

When people use the R-word as an insult, it turns intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) into shorthand for something ridiculous, embarrassing, annoying, or wrong. It doesn’t have to be aimed at a person with a disability to demean people with disabilities.

That’s why the history matters. Let’s be clear about where the R-word came from, and what it means now.

What Is the History of the R-Word?

Where Did the R-Word Come From?

The R-word comes from the Latin retardare, meaning to slow down, delay, hold back, or hinder. But where a word starts isn’t the same as what it means now.

In the United States, the R-word moved from a general word about delay into medical, educational, and legal language used to classify people with intellectual disabilities. Over time, it became a slur used to demean people across the broader IDD community.

How Did the R-Word Become a Medical Term?

By the late 1800s and early 1900s, the R-word was being used in relation to developmental delay and cognitive disabilities. At the time, it was viewed as a clinical term, but that doesn’t make its history harmless.

The word didn’t come from people with disabilities describing themselves. It came from systems built to label and classify them.

In that era, disability was often treated as something to cure, avoid, or separate from public life. Many people with disabilities were placed in institutions, denied education and employment, and shut out of community life. Eugenics made those attitudes even more dangerous, fueling laws and policies that restricted people with disabilities from immigrating, marrying, having children, and controlling their own futures.

The language used about people with disabilities reflected a society that too often made decisions about their lives without recognizing their full humanity.

How Did the R-Word Become a Slur?

The R-word didn’t become a slur overnight. Once it entered medical, educational, legal, and government systems, it became part of how people with intellectual disabilities were labeled in daily life, from school records to public benefits to disability services.

Then people pulled the word out of that context and used it to mock anyone or anything they saw as foolish, embarrassing, or wrong. By the mid-20th century, the word was being used as a slang insult, and by the 1960s it had become widely recognized as a term used to demean. For years, that insult overlapped with official use, turning a real label for people with intellectual disabilities into shorthand for something bad.

That’s why “I don’t mean people with disabilities” doesn’t hold up. When the R-word is used to mean bad, wrong, ridiculous, or embarrassing, it still treats disability as something to reject or look down on.

A person with IDD doesn’t have to be in the room for the word to target them. The target is built into the word.

How Did the R-Word Become Widely Rejected?

The shift away from the R-word was part of a larger disability rights movement. People with disabilities, families, and advocates, including The Arc, pushed schools, lawmakers, media, and the public to recognize what the word had become: a slur that demeaned people with disabilities.

That advocacy led to progress. In 2010, Rosa’s Law replaced “mental retardation” with “intellectual disability” in federal laws, reflecting what people with IDD had been saying for years: the R-word was deeply stigmatizing and harmful.

Rosa’s Law changed federal laws, but not state or local laws. Some states have updated their language, but others still use the outdated term in laws or regulations.

Culturally, the word also became taboo. For a time, many people understood that using the R-word was cruel, outdated, and unacceptable.

Why Are People Using the R-Word Again?

Today, the social boundary around the R-word has weakened.

The R-word is showing up again in comedy, entertainment, politics, social media, and everyday conversation. Its return is being fueled by shock value, backlash, nostalgia, and a lack of understanding about the word’s history.

For many people with disabilities, the R-word is tied to real experiences of being mocked, excluded, underestimated, and treated as less human. This isn’t about asking for special treatment. It’s about taking people seriously when they tell us a word has harmed them. As people with IDD have shared in their own words, this word lands as a reminder of how often their humanity is questioned.

Is It Okay for TV Shows and Comedians to Use the R-Word?

Characters can say harmful things and comedians can push boundaries. Creative choices still matter.

When stand-up specials and popular shows like Euphoria use the R-word, the spread becomes especially powerful because of reach, influence, and social permission. It moves quickly from the screen into social media, school hallways, group chats, and speech.

Some people will say this is just how people talk now. That’s not the full story.

Pop culture doesn’t just mirror what people say. It helps decide what feels acceptable to repeat. When writers, performers, and comedians fold the R-word into dialogue, they’re normalizing it. Creative work can be funny, honest, and memorable without making people with disabilities the collateral damage.

Why Does It Matter if You Use the R-Word?

Even today, people with IDD face serious barriers in education, employment, healthcare, housing, transportation, public benefits, and community life. The R-word isn’t the only problem, but if inclusion matters, the words we excuse matter too.

The words we normalize shape what people believe. What people believe shapes how they treat others. And how people are treated shapes whether people with disabilities are included, hired, taught, supported, believed, and respected.

Stopping the use of the R-word won’t solve every barrier people with disabilities face, but continuing to use it makes existing barriers harder to break down and creates new ones. Language matters because the words we accept determine whose dignity is protected and whose is dismissed.

What Should I Say Instead of the R-Word?

The best replacement for the R-word is more honest language.

If something is frustrating, say frustrating. If it’s reckless, say reckless. If it’s unfair, say unfair. If it’s confusing, say confusing. If someone made a bad decision, say that.

The English language is big enough. You don’t need a slur to make a point.

Read our explainer on what to say instead of the R-word and how to respond when others use it.

Frequently Asked Questions About the R-Word

Is the R-word a slur?

Yes. The R-word is a slur rooted in the history of intellectual disability and widely used to demean people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. It’s harmful because it uses disability as an insult.

Why is the R-word harmful if I don’t mean people with disabilities?

Because using the R-word as a punchline or put-down still uses disability as the insult. You may not mean to hurt people with disabilities, but the word still does harm.

What is the history of the R-word?

The R-word started as a word meaning delay, became a medical and legal label for people with intellectual disabilities, and later became a common insult used to demean people across the broader IDD community.

Was the R-word once a medical term?

Yes. It was once used in medical, educational, and institutional settings to describe people with intellectual disabilities.

Why are people saying the R-word again?

The social boundary around the R-word has weakened. Pop culture, comedy, politics, and social media are helping make the word feel casual again, even though people with disabilities have long made clear that it causes harm.

What did Rosa’s Law do?

Rosa’s Law changed many areas of federal law by replacing the outdated term with “intellectual disability.” It did not change state or local laws.

Picture of the U.S. Department of Education building in Washington, DC

Moving Special Education and Civil Rights Out of Education Department Risks a Patchwork of Rights for Students With Disabilities

/in , , /by Robyn Linscott

Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced plans to move the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The Arc of the United States warns that the move disregards federal law placing the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in the Department of Education and would make it harder for students with disabilities to access services, resolve discrimination, and hold states accountable under IDEA, the 50-year-old law that guarantees a free appropriate public education tailored to each child’s unique needs.

This plan follows interagency agreements announced in November 2025 that began shifting major Education Department programs to other federal agencies. But these offices are supposed to work together. Students with disabilities need access to school, special education services, accommodations, accessibility, and civil rights enforcement under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Moving that work across separate departments risks more confusion, longer delays, and less accountability for families and schools.

The Education Department says OSERS and OCR will keep their legal responsibilities and continue their work without interruption. Calling this a partnership doesn’t change what’s happening: core education and civil rights functions would be moved into agencies that weren’t created to oversee schools, special education, or education-based civil rights enforcement.

“Students with disabilities don’t experience school in agency silos,” said Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States and former Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at the U.S. Department of Education. “A student who is denied services, disciplined for disability-related needs, or blocked from an accessible classroom needs one federal education system that can see the whole picture and act. Moving special education to HHS and civil rights enforcement to DOJ would split apart the offices responsible for making disability rights real in schools, leaving families chasing answers across the federal government instead of getting accountability from one education agency.”

“HHS and DOJ have important roles, but they weren’t built to replace the Department of Education’s school-specific expertise,” said Robyn Linscott, Director of Education and Family Policy at The Arc of the United States. “Moving IDEA oversight into HHS pushes students with disabilities toward a medical model, where disability is treated as a diagnosis to manage instead of a natural part of human life. When that mindset drives education decisions, students are more likely to be segregated, underestimated, or treated as separate from the school community. IDEA belongs in an education agency because it is about classrooms, IEP meetings, behavior support, accessibility, and whether students can learn alongside their peers.”

Why OSERS and OCR belong inside the Education Department

OSERS has two primary components: the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). OSERS oversees federal programs that shape the school experience for students with disabilities and help students move from school to work and community life. It distributes federal special education funding, provides guidance to states and schools, supports teacher training, funds research on effective instruction, and helps ensure students receive the services they are legally entitled to receive.

OCR investigates discrimination in schools, including disability discrimination involving accommodations, accessibility, harassment, restraint and seclusion, and discriminatory discipline. For many families, OCR is one of the few ways to seek federal enforcement without going straight to court.

Why IDEA belongs in an education agency

IDEA is an education and civil rights law. It was created because children with disabilities were excluded from public schools, denied instruction, or sent to institutions instead of being educated in their communities.

Moving IDEA oversight into the Department of Health and Human Services risks changing how the federal government understands and responds to students with disabilities. Instead of focusing on classroom access, instruction, inclusion, services, and school accountability, it could push decisions toward diagnosis, treatment, and care management. Students with disabilities may need health care and related services, but they are students first.

That distinction matters. A medical model can lead to lower expectations, more segregation, and decisions based on diagnosis instead of what a student needs to learn and participate in school. IDEA’s promise depends on schools seeing students with disabilities as full members of the school community. That work must stay connected to the federal education systems that guide schools, support educators, and hold states accountable.

What this could mean for families

Families already spend months, sometimes years, trying to get schools to follow the law. Splitting special education and civil rights enforcement across agencies could add another layer of confusion when students can’t afford to wait.

For families of students with disabilities, this could mean:

  • More confusion about where to go when a child is denied services or accommodations
  • Longer delays when a student is missing instruction, therapies, supports, or accessible materials
  • Less coordination between special education oversight and civil rights enforcement
  • More barriers when a student faces harassment, exclusion, restraint, seclusion, or discriminatory discipline

A student’s education shouldn’t depend on whether their family can figure out which federal agency now owns which piece of the law.

What this could mean for schools and states

Schools and state education agencies need clear, consistent federal guidance. Moving OSERS to HHS and OCR to DOJ could make it harder for states and districts to understand expectations and resolve problems early. This plan could lead to:

  • Conflicting guidance from different federal agencies
  • Slower answers on IDEA and Section 504 questions
  • Less coordination between funding, technical assistance, and enforcement
  • More uneven implementation across states
  • Greater risk that families in different places receive different levels of protection

Federal disability rights shouldn’t depend on a student’s ZIP code or on which agency happens to hold part of the responsibility.

Students can’t get back lost learning time

The Department of Education’s special education and civil rights offices have been weakened by staff cuts, office closures, and delays in enforcement. Recent reports and staffing changes have shown what happens when federal capacity shrinks: complaints take longer, guidance becomes less clear, and families are left wondering whether anyone is responsible for enforcing the law.

When a student with a disability goes without the services, accommodations, accessible materials, instruction, or behavior supports they need, the impact can last a lifetime, shaping whether they graduate, continue their education, find work, participate in their community, and feel like school is a place they belong.

Moving these offices out of the Department of Education would deepen that instability at the exact moment students, families, schools, and states need clarity. The rights in IDEA and Section 504 haven’t changed, but rights are only as strong as the systems that enforce them.

Why The Arc is taking action

The Arc has fought for the education rights of students with disabilities for decades. Our advocacy helped lay the groundwork for IDEA, and we have worked ever since to protect and strengthen the systems that make that law real for students and families.

The Arc is also a plaintiff in Somerville Public Schools et al. v. Trump et al., a federal lawsuit challenging efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. We joined that case because weakening federal education capacity threatens special education oversight, civil rights enforcement, and the ability of students with disabilities to access the education federal law promises them.

The Arc’s policy and legal advocacy teams continue to meet with policymakers and education officials to protect IDEA, Section 504, and the federal infrastructure students with disabilities rely on.

We urge Congress to step in immediately, assert its constitutional role over federal agencies, and keep critical education and civil rights programs where the law says they belong. Students’ rights may remain in statute, but those rights are only meaningful when families can access the systems that enforce them.

For reporters: interview availability

The Arc can connect reporters with national policy experts who can explain the impact of this decision on students with disabilities nationwide.

Robyn Linscott, Director of Education and Family Policy at The Arc of the United States, is available for interviews on what this move means for students with disabilities, families, schools, IDEA, Section 504, and federal civil rights enforcement.

Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States and former Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary in OSERS, is also available for interviews on the history and federal role of special education oversight.

More on the dismantling of the Department of Education