What happened?
DREDF and a law firm called Fox & Robertson filed a legal paper in court. The paper is called an “amicus brief.” An amicus brief is a paper that people who are not part of a lawsuit give to the court. It shares information to help the court decide the case.
DREDF filed this brief for nine disability rights groups. DREDF Executive Director Michelle Uzeta wrote it with Amy Robertson from Fox & Robertson. They filed it in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The brief supports the National Association of the Deaf (NAD). NAD is a group that works for the rights of Deaf people.
What NAD is asking for
NAD wants two things.
First, NAD wants the White House to bring back American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters at White House press briefings. ASL is a language that many Deaf people use. An interpreter is a person who turns spoken words into sign language. A press briefing is a meeting where the government shares news with reporters.
Second—and this matters even more—NAD wants to protect the right of disabled people to take the government to court when a federal agency treats them unfairly.
How we got here
This fight has gone on for a long time.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, NAD sued the first Trump administration. NAD wanted ASL interpreters at White House press briefings. The court agreed and ordered the White House to provide them.
Later, the Biden administration settled the case. It agreed to provide interpreters at many kinds of White House events.
Then the second Trump administration started. Soon after, it stopped providing interpreters.
Around the same time, the government took other actions against disability rights. On its first day, it ordered the end of federal accessibility programs. It also shared a list of words it does not want people to use. Many of these words matter to disabled people and to disability law. They include “accessible,” “autism,” “barrier,” “disability,” “discrimination,” “equal opportunity,” “excluded,” “integration,” “mental health,” and “segregation.”
When the White House explained why it stopped the interpreters, it said the President wants to control his own image. It said he does not want to share his platform with ASL interpreters.
Back to court
NAD went back to court. Again, the court ordered the White House to provide ASL interpreters. This time, the order covers all White House press briefings that are announced to the public.
The White House is now appealing. To appeal means to ask a higher court to change the decision.
But the White House’s argument goes much further than sign language. It says disabled people should not be allowed to sue federal agencies for disability discrimination at all.
Why that argument is wrong
The law does not support what the White House is saying.
A law called Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act says that federal agencies cannot discriminate against people because they are disabled. To discriminate means to treat someone worse or leave them out because of who they are.
Since 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that people can sue when this happens. This right to sue is called a “private right of action.” It means a person can bring a lawsuit on their own. Many courts have agreed that this right includes the right to sue federal agencies. Even the government itself has agreed at times, when it helped its own court cases.
Why this matters
Millions of disabled people use federal programs and services every day. Here is what is at stake:
- About 13 out of every 100 people in the U.S. are disabled. (This is from 2021 Census data.)
- National parks had more than 331 million visits in 2024. At least 44 million of those visits likely involved disabled people.
- Airport security (the Transportation Security Administration, or TSA) had 906 million passenger interactions. More than 120 million of those likely involved disabled travelers.
- Over 5 million disabled veterans depend on federal agencies for the healthcare and housing they earned through their service.
- Federal prisons held 155,270 people in 2025. About 29 out of every 100 federal prisoners are disabled. That means more than 44,000 disabled people are in federal prison.
If the White House wins its argument, none of these people could go to court to challenge disability discrimination by a federal agency.
Who joined DREDF on the Brief?
Eight other disability rights groups joined DREDF in the brief:
