Welcome to the Washington Connection, the legislative and information service of the American Council of the Blind. The Washington Connection is brought to you by the ACB national office. If you have any questions or comments on the information provided, don’t hesitate to contact us and ask to speak with Claire Stanley.
The Washington Connection is updated any time we have new information to share with you. The following articles are available as of August 6, 2026. Messages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 are new.
- New! Louisiana Drops out of Texas v. Kennedy Lawsuit
- New! ASAP Reauthorization Act Introduced in the Senate
- New! Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Blind Vendors
- New! Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act Heads to the House
- New! Clarification on Department of Justice Guidance Titled, “Statement of the Department of Justice on Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C.”
- Judge Halts Proposed Rule Regarding Mail-In Ballots
- Air Carrier Access Amendments Act Reintroduced in Congress
- New! Montana Dropping Out of Texas v. Kennedy Lawsuit
Thank you for calling the Washington Connection.
Louisiana Drops Out of Texas v. Kennedy Lawsuit
We are thrilled to announce that Louisiana is dropping out of the Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit! This lawsuit aims to weaken disability rights by attacking Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as well as the Supreme Court's ruling in Olmstead v. L.C. Now that Louisiana is withdrawing, only four states remain part of this lawsuit fighting against the rights of people with disabilities to live and receive care in their communities. More than half of the 9 states who filed the amended complaint earlier this year have dropped out so far. Congratulations to the Louisiana advocates who have worked tirelessly to get their state to drop out of this damaging lawsuit!
If you live in one of the remaining states that are part of this case, we strongly encourage you to continue to contact your governor and your state attorney general to demand that they drop out! The remaining states are: Alaska, Florida, Montana, and Texas. Below you will find the contact info for each office. Thank you!
Alaska Governor's Office: 907-465-3500
Alaska Attorney General's Office: 907-269-5100
Florida Governor's Office: 850-717-9337
Florida Attorney General's Office: 850-414-3300
Montana Governor's Office: 406-444-3111
Montana Attorney General's Office: 406-444-2026
Texas Governor's Office: 512-463-2000
Texas Attorney General's Office: 512-463-2100
ASAP Reauthorization Act Introduced in the Senate
Senator Duckworth of Illinois and Senator McCormick of Pennsylvania recently introduced the ASAP Reauthorization Act in the Senate. This bipartisan legislation would reauthorize the All Stations Accessibility Program (ASAP) grants, which were passed as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021. These grants provide federal money to states so that they can make accessibility improvements at legacy public transit stations. Examples of such improvements include elevator and ramp installations, as well as accessible wayfinding measures. Legacy public transit stations are those that pre-date the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), like those found in Chicago and Philadelphia, which often need improvements in order to be fully compliant with the ADA. The companion bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García of Illinois and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
ACB proudly supported the All Stations Accessibility Program in 2021, and we are similarly proud to support the ASAP Reauthorization Act today.
Senator Duckworth's press release on the bill can be found here: https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-mccormick-lead-bipartisan-push-to-renew-asap-program-helping-make-transit-accessible-for-all
The text of the Senate bill can be found here: https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/asap_reauthorization_act.pdf
Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Blind Vendors
A federal judge for the U.S. District Court of Maryland has granted summary judgement to the blind entrepreneurs in the suit of Melba Taylor, et al., v. U.S. Department of Education, which challenged the Department of Education's decision in late 2025 to limit the Randolph-Sheppard program in Army dining facilities. The Randolph-Sheppard Vending Facility program enhances employment opportunities for people who are blind by giving blind vendors priority consideration in the operation of vending facilities on federal property. In the judge's ruling, he found that Secretary McMahon violated the Administrative Procedures Act by not allowing public notice-and-comment process to take place or publishing supporting documentation before taking the action which negatively impacted blind vendors.
ACB applauds this ruling which upholds the integrity of the Randolph-Sheppard program, which is so vital for this community.
The full ruling can be found at the following link: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/priority-contracting-for-blind-vendors.pdf
Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act Heads to the House
In July, we announced that the Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act had passed the Senate and is headed to the House of Representatives. Due to this exciting development, we have updated our Speak4 campaign for the OAA Reauthorization Act, so that Speak4 messages are sent to the House of Representatives instead of the Senate. We encourage everyone to tell their representatives to pass this vital piece of legislation! A link to the updated Speak4 campaign can be found here: https://speak4.app/lp/5p01rspz?ts=1785950066
Clarification on Department of Justice Guidance Titled, “Statement of the Department of Justice on Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C.”
As printed in the Federal Register, July 20, 2026.
The Department of Justice is issuing this document to clarify that the guidance issued by the Department on June 22, 2011, and last updated February 28, 2020, titled “Statement of the Department of Justice on Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C.” (Olmstead Guidance), and similar guidance documents are not enforceable. In addition, the Department plans to revisit the Olmstead Guidance in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369, 400 (2024), to assess whether the Olmstead Guidance is consistent with the single best meaning of the relevant statutory text. The Department will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
On June 22, 2011, the Department issued a guidance document titled, “Statement of the Department of Justice on Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C.” The Olmstead Guidance states, “To assist individuals in understanding their rights under Title II of the ADA and its integration mandate, and to assist state and local governments in complying with the ADA, the Department of Justice has created this technical assistance guide.” It provides eighteen questions and answers regarding enforcement of the Supreme Court's decision in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999).
The Olmstead Guidance concludes: “Guidance documents posted to this website are not intended to be a final agency action, have no legally binding effect, and have no force or effect of law. The documents may be rescinded or modified in the Department's complete discretion, in accordance with applicable laws. The Department's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities beyond what is required by the terms of the applicable statutes, regulations, or binding judicial precedent.” This is consistent with Supreme Court jurisprudence, which has held that guidance documents “do not have the force and effect of law.” Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass'n, 575 U.S. 92, 97 (2015) (quoting Shalala v. Guernsey Mem'l Hosp., 514 U.S. 87, 99 (1995)). Despite the non-enforceable nature of the Olmstead Guidance, numerous courts have treated the Olmstead Guidance as authoritative. See Davis v. Shah, 821 F.3d 231, 263 (2d Cir. 2016); Pashby v. Delia, 709 F.3d 307, 322 (4th Cir. 2013); Waskul v. Washtenaw Cnty. Cmty. Mental Health, 979 F.3d 426, 460-61 (6th Cir. 2020); Steimel v. Wernert, 823 F.3d 902, 914 (7th Cir. 2016); but see United States v. Mississippi, 82 F.4th 387, 393-94 (5th Cir. 2023). The Department is concerned about confusion over the non-enforceable nature of the Olmstead Guidance and issues this clarification that the Olmstead Guidance is not enforceable.
Further, the Olmstead Guidance was issued prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright, 603 U.S. at 400, which held that agency interpretations must be consistent with the “single, best meaning” of the statute authorizing them. For these reasons, the Department plans to revisit the Olmstead Guidance in light of Loper Bright to determine whether the Olmstead Guidance is consistent with the “single, best meaning” of the ADA. The Department will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement of Title II of the ADA.
For more information, visit https://tinyurl.com/3zwwusfh.
Judge Halts Proposed Rule Regarding Mail-In Ballots
A federal judge has halted a proposed rule by the United States Postal Service which would restrict mail-in ballots. The proposed Rule would require, among other things, that states provide USPS with lists of voters who are eligible to receive mail-in ballots for federal elections. Then, USPS would be required to compare ballots they are sending out to those voter lists and could refuse to accept or deliver ballots that USPS determines do not comply with the new requirements.
The USPS was accepting comments on this issue through July 2, 2026. ACB already submitted comments to the USPS through the Federal register regarding our opposition to the Proposed Rule and how the Proposed Rule would likely disproportionately impact voters who are blind or have low vision. ACB's comments can be found on our website here: https://www.acb.org/advocacy
The judge has found that the USPS Proposed Rule would violate a current settlement agreement between the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and USPS. In the settlement agreement, which is in effect through the 2028 election, both parties stipulated that USPS agreed to "prioritize monitoring and timely delivery of election mail." The NAACP argued that the Proposed Rule would violate that portion of the settlement agreement. The federal judge found in favor of the NAACP and granted their motion to enforce compliance with the settlement agreement.
The judge's opinion may be found at this link: https://www.citizen.org/wp-content/uploads/opinion.pdf
A news article regarding this matter can be found at this link: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5951135-judge-halts-usps-mailin-ballot/
Air Carrier Access Amendments Act Reintroduced in Congress
The Air Carrier Access Amendments Act was recently reintroduced in Congress. Rep. Dina Titus of Nevada and Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin have introduced the bill in the House and Senate, respectively. This legislation would require the Secretary of Transportation to assess civil penalties for violations and refer patterns of discrimination to the Department of Justice. Additionally, this bill would grant individuals with disabilities whose rights are violated by an air carrier a private right of action in civil court. That means individuals would be able to sue the air carriers directly, which is not permitted under the current law.
The House press release for the bill reintroduction can be found here: https://titus.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=5912
The Senate press release for the bill reintroduction can be found here: https://www.baldwin.senate.gov/news/press-releases/baldwin-duckworth-lead-bill-to-protect-and-expand-the-rights-of-airplane-passengers-with-disabilities
The text of the bill can be found here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9373/text
A one-pager on the bill can be found here: https://www.baldwin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/air_carrier_access_amendments_act_one-pager.pdf
Use the Speak4 link here to ask your Congressmembers to support the Air Carrier Access Amendments Act: https://speak4.app/lp/58012s4t?ts=1782401882
Montana Dropping Out of Texas v. Kennedy Lawsuit
We are pleased to say that there are reports that Montana is dropping out of the Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit! Although there has not yet been an official court filing withdrawing Montana from the case, several disability rights organizations have posted that Montana is dropping out. This lawsuit aims to weaken disability rights by attacking Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as well as the Supreme Court's ruling in Olmstead v. L.C. Now that Louisiana is withdrawing, only four states remain part of this lawsuit fighting against the rights of people with disabilities to live and receive care in their communities. Two-thirds of the 9 states who filed the amended complaint earlier this year have dropped out so far. Congratulations to the Montana advocates who have worked so hard to get their state to drop out of this damaging lawsuit!
If you live in one of the remaining states that are part of this case, we strongly encourage you to continue to contact your governor and your state attorney general to demand that they drop out! The remaining states are: Alaska, Florida, and Texas. Below you will find the contact info for each office. Thank you!
Alaska Governor's Office: 907-465-3500
Alaska Attorney General's Office: 907-269-5100
Florida Governor's Office: 850-717-9337
Florida Attorney General's Office: 850-414-3300
Texas Governor's Office: 512-463-2000
Texas Attorney General's Office: 512-463-2100