On June 27, 2025, a U.S. Supreme Court decision ensured the continuity of the Universal Services Fund (USF), an important federal program that provides internet access to millions of Americans. Today, people living in rural areas, low-income households, schools, libraries, and rural hospitals rely on the USF to access telephone, internet, and broadband services. This decision has important implications for people with disabilities and their access to internet and broadband services.
This resource provides an overview of what the USF does, why the Supreme Court ruled on its legality, and how it affects people with disabilities.
What is the Universal Services Fund?
Since its establishment in 1934, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has administered several programs with the goal of providing universal access to telecommunication services for all Americans. These services include telephone and voice connectivity, high-speed internet access, and the Telecommunication Relay Service (TRS) providing accessible communication services for people who are deaf, deaf-blind, or have hearing and speech disabilities.
The USF is one of the largest FCC programs, established via Section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. This fund, estimated to be around eight billion dollars, provides affordable telephone, voice, and internet access to rural areas, low-income households, geographically isolated regions, schools, libraries, and underserved communities. People with disabilities are disproportionately likely to be low-income. For example, in 2022, about 1 in 4 working-age people with disabilities (ages 18–64) lived in poverty (24.9%), compared to 10.1% of working-age people without disabilities. Rural communities also have a higher concentration of disabled residents. In 2021, 14.7% of rural residents reported a disability, compared with 12.6% of urban residents. The USF is administered by a private nonprofit entity called the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), an independent organization created by the FCC.
The USF has four core programs:
(1) Connect America: According to a report by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), one in five American households did not have access to the internet as of 2022. The Connect America program provides affordable broadband services to millions of households in both urban and rural areas and creates more educational and employment opportunities. Specifically, the program provides targeted subsidies to internet service providers so they can build broadband infrastructure and offer lower-cost service to households in rural and underserved areas.
(2) Lifeline: Since 1985, the Lifeline program has provided phone subsidies to low-income consumers, beneficiaries of federal assistance programs, and survivors of violence. Under this program, the FCC currently provides mobile voice and broadband support to over 1.2 million households living in urban, rural, and tribal areas across the country.
(3) Schools and Libraries (E-Rate): This program provides Wi-Fi devices, hotspots, and internet access to schools and libraries at a subsidized rate. Eligible schools and libraries can be based in both urban and rural areas anywhere in the country.
(4) Rural Health Care: This program provides financial support for rural healthcare providers, such as hospitals, medical colleges, community clinics, non-profit medical facilities, and mental health providers. This support includes subsidies for high-speed internet, broadband facilities, telephone and voice access, and other connectivity tools.
How is USF funded?
The USF is unique among government programs. It is not funded by Congressional appropriations but by fees collected from telecommunications carriers doing business in the United States. Phone carriers like Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, paging companies, and certain Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) companies like Vonage or Zoom Phone are some examples of the contributors to this program. These companies are required to pay a percentage of their interstate and international revenues to the USF. Telecom carriers are allowed to pass on these charges to their consumers as a line item in their bills.
Why was the legality of USF questioned?
In Consumers’ Research v. FCC, a lawsuit in the Fifth Circuit, the consumer protection organization Consumers’ Research argued that Congress failed to set sufficient limits when delegating authority to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and that the FCC lacks the power to administer the USF program. They also challenged the fees that consumers are required to pay on their bills as contributions to the USF.
The Fifth Circuit Court ruled in Consumers’ Research’s favor, declaring the USF unconstitutional. The Circuit Court held that the FCC violated the authority vested in it by the U.S. Congress because of two reasons: (1) the FCC delegated the operations of the USF to a private commission, and (2) it levied fees on telecommunication companies. This decision threatened the USF, a crucial program providing internet and telephone access to millions of Americans with disabilities. There were also parallel pending cases in the Sixth and Eleventh Circuit Courts that upheld the constitutionality of the USF. To resolve the circuit split, the FCC filed a petition before the US Supreme Court in September 2024.
The Supreme Court in a 6-3 majority opinion held that the USF is constitutional and rejected the Fifth Circuit Court’s earlier decision blocking the continuation of the USF. This is a significant development. It ensures continuity of this important program, while also clarifying that the FCC did not violate the U.S. Constitution. This judgment holds promise for the millions of Americans who rely on the USF to access telephone, broadband, telehealth, and other remote services.
How do these developments affect people with disabilities?
Americans with disabilities face a significant digital divide. According to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center, people with disabilities are three times more likely to never go online as compared to nondisabled people. The study also highlights significant gaps in the ownership of digital devices such as laptops, computers, and smartphones among people with disabilities. Especially because people with disabilities face higher levels of poverty and unemployment, the affordability of broadband and internet remains a crucial issue. Programs such as the USF play a significant role in making internet access affordable and closing the digital divide for people with disabilities.
Millions of low-income households and households living in rural and underserved communities rely on the USF to have a reliable phone, broadband, and mobile connection, and among these households are millions of people with disabilities. These telecommunications services are often the primary means for disabled people to access education, employment, healthcare, and other essential services.
The USF’s E-Rate program is important for children with disabilities, who often rely heavily on the internet and broadband access provided in their schools and libraries. Moreover, people with disabilities, particularly those living in rural areas, often rely on telehealth and other digital-first and remote services. The inaccessibility of infrastructure and lack of accessible transportation make telehealth and other remote services an important resource for maintaining and increasing people’s quality of life. The closure of the USF would have resulted in many disabled people struggling to access jobs, educational opportunities, and healthcare services.
Recently, the Trump administration has been threatening to cut funding from many important FCC programs, such as the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. The BEAD program expands high-speed internet access, funds state infrastructure, and supports internet connectivity programs for underserved communities, like people with disabilities. Therefore, the continuation of the USF program is critical to ensure that people with disabilities and other marginalized groups do not face an increase in the digital divide that keeps people from accessing important information, services, and opportunities.
What happens to the USF now?
While the Supreme Court decision ensures the continued legality of the USF program, many challenges still remain in its implementation. These challenges include ensuring affordability of the internet even at the subsidized rate, deciding which communities are covered by the program, and determining how to make the USF sustainable given the already large and growing need for its programs and subsidies. One of the most widely discussed issues is who should fund the USF program. The USF’s contribution base has grown smaller and smaller as fewer people use traditional voice telecommunications like landlines. Increasingly, businesses and consumers are using voice over (VoIP), streaming services (like WhatsApp and Zoom), and other IP-based communication methods. These communication methods are not universally required to contribute to the USF, like traditional telecommunications providers are.
Recently, the US Congress renewed its efforts to modernize the USF program. A working group to modernize the USF has been formed under the leadership of Senators Deb Fischer (R-NE) and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Chair and Ranking Member of the Telecommunications and Media Subcommittee, respectively. This working group invited comments from different stakeholders, including industry leaders, associations, and nonprofits, on ideas to modernize the USF. The FCC is engaged in similar efforts to revise and restructure the program. Further advocacy will be required to ensure that the USF continues to receive funds, covers underserved communities, and addresses the growing unaffordability of broadband and internet.
AAPD does not endorse any particular set of reforms at this time. However, any effort to reform the USF must pay particular attention to the implications for people with disabilities in low-income households. Any proposal that increases consumer costs or exacerbates barriers to connectivity should be rejected. AAPD continues to advocate for the right to affordable internet access and access to assistive technologies for all Americans with disabilities.