ADA Watch Action Center · Community Living

Defend Community Integration

The right of people with disabilities to live, receive services, work, and participate in the community is under active federal attack. The ADA, Section 504, and Olmstead v. L.C. have not been repealed or overturned. But the federal government has adopted a sharply narrower legal position and is now seeking to remove express community-integration protections from HHS regulations.

Updated September 7, 2026

A wheelchair user greeting another person outdoors while two others stand nearby.
The mandate is still law. The Supreme Court’s Olmstead decision remains binding precedent. Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act remain federal law. A change in an administration’s legal interpretation does not itself repeal those statutes or overrule the Supreme Court.

What the integration mandate protects

The ADA’s integration mandate is rooted in the principle that people with disabilities should not be unnecessarily segregated in institutions or other disability-only settings when they can appropriately receive services in the community.

In Olmstead v. L.C., the Supreme Court held that unjustified segregation of people with disabilities can constitute discrimination under Title II of the ADA. Under the traditional Olmstead framework, a state or local government generally must provide community-based services when:

  1. community-based services are appropriate to the person’s needs;
  2. the person does not oppose receiving services in the community; and
  3. the services can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the public entity’s available resources and the needs of others receiving disability services.

This is about more than where someone sleeps. Community integration can affect access to home- and community-based services, mental-health services, employment and day services, nursing and personal-care supports, discharge planning, housing-related supports, and other services that make it possible to live and participate in ordinary community life.

What changed in 2026

June 18: DOJ changes its legal interpretation

The Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion asserting that neither Title II of the ADA nor Section 504 itself imposes an integration mandate on states and that the statutes do not authorize federal agencies to impose one.

July 20: DOJ steps back from Olmstead guidance

DOJ published a Federal Register notice stating that it will not rely on its longstanding Olmstead guidance when enforcing Title II and that it plans to revisit the guidance under its narrower reading of federal law.

August 31: HHS integration regulations targeted

In Texas v. Kennedy, the federal government and several plaintiff states asked the court to vacate references to community integration throughout HHS’s 2024 Section 504 regulations, including the rule’s integration provision.

Why Texas v. Kennedy matters

The 2024 HHS Section 504 regulations contain explicit protections requiring covered health and human-services programs to administer services in the most integrated setting appropriate. The August 31 proposed resolution asks the court to remove the regulations’ community-integration provisions while leaving the rest of the 2024 Section 504 rule intact.

The court still must act on that request. A proposed resolution is not the same thing as a final court decision. And even if the court grants it, the order would not itself repeal the ADA, repeal Section 504, or overturn Olmstead.

But removing the HHS rule’s express integration protections could make enforcement more difficult and create additional uncertainty for people relying on Medicaid-funded services, behavioral-health systems, nursing-facility transition and diversion programs, home- and community-based services, and other federally funded health and human-services programs.

People at risk of institutionalization

An especially important issue is whether people must wait until they are actually institutionalized before they can challenge a service system that places them at serious risk of institutionalization.

For years, disability-rights advocates and multiple courts have recognized “at-risk” claims. On March 31, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held in United States v. Florida that serious risk of institutionalization may constitute actionable discrimination under Title II of the ADA.

Current DOJ public information also continues to tell people with disabilities that the integration mandate applies both to people who are institutionalized and people at serious risk of institutionalization. That public guidance now sits in tension with DOJ’s newer Office of Legal Counsel opinion and enforcement posture.

What has not changed

  • Olmstead v. L.C. remains Supreme Court precedent.
  • Title II of the ADA remains federal law.
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act remains federal law.
  • Existing court orders, consent decrees and settlements are not automatically erased by a change in DOJ policy.
  • Private enforcement remains possible, although particular claims and remedies may become more contested.
  • States may provide protections that go beyond the federal floor.

The critical distinction is between the law and the federal government’s current position about the law. An administration can change how federal agencies investigate, litigate, settle, defend and explain community-integration cases. It cannot, by legal opinion or guidance notice alone, amend the ADA, rewrite Section 504, or overrule the Supreme Court.

Take action now

Defending community integration requires both national advocacy and protection of individual rights on the ground.

If you or someone you support is at risk

  • Document what community service is needed, what was requested, what was denied or reduced, and what institutional or segregated alternative is being offered.
  • Save assessments, Medicaid notices, service plans, discharge plans, denial letters and communications with agencies and providers.
  • Contact your state Protection and Advocacy organization before an emergency placement, discharge or appeal deadline whenever possible.
  • Consider filing an ADA complaint with DOJ and, for HHS-funded health or human-services programs, a Section 504 complaint with HHS Office for Civil Rights.

For advocates and organizations

  • Join coordinated national efforts defending community integration.
  • Contact governors, state attorneys general, members of Congress, DOJ and HHS about preserving community-integration protections.
  • Track Texas v. Kennedy for an order granting, modifying or rejecting the proposed resolution.
  • Document state-level changes in HCBS access, institutional placement, discharge practices and other signs of increasing segregation.
Defend Community Integration Coalition File an ADA complaint File an HHS civil-rights complaint Find your Protection & Advocacy organization

Primary sources and further reading

  1. DOJ Office of Legal Counsel — June 18, 2026 opinion on the ADA, Section 504 and institutionalization
  2. Federal Register — July 20, 2026 DOJ notice concerning Olmstead guidance
  3. ADA.gov — Community Integration
  4. ADA.gov — DOJ Olmstead technical-assistance statement
  5. HHS Office for Civil Rights — Understanding Olmstead and Community Integration
  6. DREDF — National disability organizations on the proposed resolution in Texas v. Kennedy
  7. American Council of the Blind — Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit update
  8. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit — United States v. Florida, March 31, 2026

ADA Watch provides public education and advocacy information. This page is not legal advice. People facing an immediate institutional placement, discharge, loss of services or appeal deadline should seek individualized legal assistance.