Seventeen states are no longer seeking to invalidate one of the nation’s key disability rights laws, but advocates say threats remain.

A lawsuit brought by Texas and 16 other states garnered significant attention earlier this year because it sought to declare Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act unconstitutional.

The 1973 law bars discrimination on the basis of disability at any entity that receives federal funds. It has a wide reach affecting health care, public education, housing, transportation and much more.

Disability advocates pushed back against the states’ move to overturn the statute, warning that a successful challenge to the constitutionality of Section 504 could also undermine other laws including the Americans with Disabilities Act.

After facing backlash, the states are withdrawing their constitutional claim.

“Plaintiffs further clarify that they have no intention to seek any relief from this Court on Count 3 (Section 504 is Unconstitutional) of their Complaint, including that in their Demand for Relief,” reads a recent status update the state attorneys general filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

However, the states are still pursuing the broader case, now known as Texas v. Kennedy, which was filed in response to an update to Section 504 regulations that the Biden administration finalized last year.

The decision to drop the constitutional claim “shows the power of the disability community’s advocacy,” said Shira Wakschlag, senior executive officer for legal advocacy and general counsel at The Arc. “However, the case remains a significant threat to the rights of people with disabilities, as the 17 states continue to challenge the updated Section 504 regulations covering, among other things, the right to receive services in the community, accessible medical equipment and prohibiting medical discrimination against people with disabilities.”

The regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services marked the first update to Section 504 regulations in 50 years. The rule clarified that medical providers cannot make treatment decisions based on disability biases, expanded the availability of accessible medical diagnostic equipment like exam tables and set expectations for accessibility on providers’ websites and mobile applications, among other changes.

“The final regulation is responsive to extensive information about the types of discrimination and barriers that people with disabilities face in accessing HHS-funded health and human services. It was based on thousands of comments from people with disabilities, their families and a wide range of providers, states and other covered entities; decades of enforcement activities by (Office for Civil Rights) and the Department of Justice under Section 504; and reams of research about disability discrimination in health and human services and the impacts of it,” said Alison Barkoff, a professor at George Washington University who led HHS’ Administration on Community Living under the Biden administration. “It would be a major step backwards in protecting people with disabilities from discrimination in federally funded health and human services if the HHS Section 504 regulations are thrown out.”