The Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit challenging the federal rule that requires states to provide disability services in community settings rather than institutions has a new procedural update. Two states have dropped out since the original January 2026 filing. Seven now remain: Alaska, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, and Texas.

Indiana dropped out on May 1, 2026. South Dakota followed on May 12. Neither state gave a public explanation for withdrawing.

On May 19, 2026, the remaining seven states filed a motion for summary judgment. That's a request asking the court to rule without a full trial, based on the legal briefs alone. The federal government must file its response by June 15, 2026. The states' reply is due July 7. A ruling could come before the end of 2026.

The states also dropped their constitutional challenge to Section 504 itself. They now challenge only HHS's 2024 integration mandate regulations, the rule requiring that people with disabilities receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.

If the states win, the federal requirement to fund Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS) waivers could fall. States could treat community-based care as optional, not mandated. Families who rely on those waivers to keep their children or adult relatives at home would lose a federally-backed right.

What the Integration Mandate Is and Why It Matters

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973) is a civil rights law. Programs that receive federal funds can't discriminate based on disability. Medicaid receives federal funds. That's the connection.

The integration mandate is HHS's interpretation of Section 504, formalized in a 2024 rule. It requires states to provide disability services in "the most integrated setting appropriate" to each person's needs. That phrase comes from Olmstead v. L.C., a 1999 Supreme Court case that held unnecessary institutionalization violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.

In practice: if someone with a disability can be served in their home or community with appropriate supports, the state can't force them into an institution because it's administratively easier or cheaper.

HCBS waivers exist because of this principle. They let states use Medicaid funds to pay for services in homes and communities instead of nursing facilities or ICF/IID placements. Without the integration mandate as a federal rule, states would no longer be required to offer those waivers.

What Summary Judgment Means

Summary judgment means the court decides on the briefs alone. No witnesses. No testimony. No chance for families who rely on HCBS to tell their stories in court.

The court looks at the legal arguments and rules on whether HHS had the authority to issue the integration mandate regulation. If the judge agrees with the states, the rule falls. If the judge sides with the federal government, the rule stands, and the states would need to appeal to a higher court.

That's why the federal government's June 15 response matters. It's the only opportunity for DOJ and HHS to argue why the integration mandate is a valid interpretation of Section 504 and why community-based services are a civil right, not just a policy preference.

What Happens to HCBS Waivers If the States Win

HCBS waivers don't disappear immediately if this lawsuit succeeds. But the legal foundation changes.

Right now, states operate HCBS waivers under Medicaid's 1915(c) authority. The integration mandate rule ensures that offering those waivers is expected, not optional. States that refuse to offer HCBS could be found out of compliance with federal civil rights law.

If the integration mandate falls:

• States could argue they're no longer required to fund HCBS waivers at all
• States facing budget pressure could scale back or eliminate waiver programs without federal penalty
• Families on waiting lists could face indefinite delays with no federal recourse
• People currently receiving waiver services could see those services cut or converted to institutional placements

The ADA Title II still exists. Olmstead is still Supreme Court precedent. But if HHS can't enforce the integration mandate through Section 504, the mechanism for compelling states to fund community-based care weakens significantly.

Families would need to bring individual ADA lawsuits to enforce Olmstead rights, a slower, more expensive, less accessible path than federal enforcement.

What Families Can Do Before June 15

You have 26 days from May 19 to push for a vigorous federal defense of the integration mandate.

1. Contact the Department of Justice and HHS

The DOJ Civil Rights Division and the HHS Office for Civil Rights are preparing the federal response. Let them know how the integration mandate affects your family.

• DOJ Civil Rights Division: https://www.justice.gov/crt (online complaint form under "Contact Us")
• HHS Office for Civil Rights: https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/complaints or call 1-800-368-1019

In your message, state:

• Your name and state
• That you're writing about Texas v. Kennedy and the May 19, 2026 motion for summary judgment
• Whether you or your family member receives HCBS waiver services or is on a waiting list
• What would happen if those services were no longer federally protected (e.g., forced institutionalization, loss of community support, family caregiver burnout)

Keep it short. Two to four sentences is enough. The volume of messages matters more than length.

2. Contact Your Senators and Representative

Even if you don't live in one of the seven plaintiff states, this case sets federal precedent. If the integration mandate falls, other states could follow the same argument to reduce HCBS funding.

Find your representatives: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member

Call or use their online contact forms. Your message:

• You're a constituent
• You're writing about Texas v. Kennedy and the integration mandate
• You urge them to support the federal government's defense of the integration mandate and to advocate within the administration for a strong legal response

Congressional offices track constituent contacts by issue. Your call gets logged. When enough constituents contact the office about the same issue, it moves up the priority list.

3. Engage With Disability Rights Organizations

DREDF (Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund) has launched a Protect-504 campaign. The Arc and other national disability rights organizations are coordinating advocacy.

• DREDF Protect-504: https://dredf.org/protect-504/
• The Arc: https://thearc.org/
• Disability Belongs: https://www.disabilitybelongs.org/

Sign up for their advocacy alerts. Many organizations will send templated emails or call scripts when critical moments arrive. The June 15 federal response deadline is one of those moments.

4. Document Your Family's Current Services

If this lawsuit succeeds and your state moves to cut HCBS funding, documentation becomes the record you'll need to argue for continuity of care or to file an individual Olmstead claim.

Write down now:

• Provider names, service types, hours per week
• When services started
• Any waiting list position or service gaps
• How those services enable your family member to live at home instead of an institution

Keep this in a file separate from your general records. If you need it later, you'll know exactly where it is.

If You Live in One of the Seven Plaintiff States

The plaintiff states are Alaska, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, and Texas.

If you live in one of these states, contact your state Attorney General's office in addition to the federal contacts above. You don't need to be a lawyer. A short message works:

"I'm a constituent and a family member of someone who receives (or is waiting for) Medicaid HCBS waiver services. Texas v. Kennedy threatens those services. I urge you to withdraw from this lawsuit."

Many state AG offices have online contact forms specifically for constituent concerns. Google "[your state] Attorney General contact" to find it.

The Timeline From Here

• June 15, 2026: Federal government's response brief due
• July 7, 2026: States' reply brief due
• After July 7: The court decides when to rule. No set deadline. A ruling could come within weeks or take months.

The summary judgment format compresses the timeline. Without a trial, the court can rule as soon as the briefs are filed and reviewed. That's why this could be decided before the end of 2026.

What Olmstead Protections Still Mean

Olmstead v. L.C. is still Supreme Court precedent. The ADA Title II still prohibits unnecessary institutionalization.

Even if HHS loses the authority to enforce the integration mandate through Section 504, the underlying legal principle remains: states can't force people with disabilities into institutions when community-based care is appropriate.

The difference is enforcement. Right now, HHS can tie Medicaid funding compliance to the integration mandate. If that falls, families would need to bring individual lawsuits under ADA Title II to enforce Olmstead rights.

That's a slower path. It puts the burden on individual families rather than federal enforcement. It requires finding a lawyer, filing in federal court, and waiting for a judge to rule on your specific case. Federal enforcement through Section 504 is faster, broader, and more accessible.

That's what's at stake in this lawsuit.