The reality of accessibility law
5,114 ADA digital accessibility lawsuits were filed in 2025 alone
Source: UsableNet 2025 Year-End Digital Accessibility Lawsuit Report
But how do we make sense of that number, and what does it mean for your business?
If you’ve researched website accessibility law, you’ve probably discovered two things at once: many laws reference accessibility, and there is no single statute that clearly defines what an “accessible website” looks like for private businesses. That tension is real, but it does not mean the legal landscape is unclear.
Digital accessibility sits at the intersection of civil rights law, regulatory interpretation, court decisions, private litigation, and procurement standards. For business owners, the important question is not simply “What does the law say?” but “How does this affect my organization in practice?”
Accessibility is rooted in civil rights law
Accessibility requirements did not emerge because of technology trends or usability preferences. They are rooted in civil rights law. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), passed in 1990, was designed to ensure equal participation in public life. At the time, that primarily meant physical spaces.
Today, public life includes digital spaces: websites, online booking systems, e-commerce platforms, job applications, and customer portals. Courts have increasingly recognized that excluding someone from digital access can be just as limiting as excluding them from a physical location. That framing matters because accessibility is not simply a technical upgrade; it is part of nondiscrimination law.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
For most private businesses in the United States, ADA Title III is the primary federal law. It requires “full and equal enjoyment” of goods and services offered by places of public accommodation.
The ADA does not mention websites. Because Congress never updated the statute to define digital accessibility, courts have interpreted how it applies online. Some federal circuits require a connection between a website and a physical location; others interpret the law more broadly. This variation creates legal nuance, but not immunity.
Thousands of ADA website lawsuits are filed every year, and courts across the country have treated websites and mobile apps as covered when they are integral to a business’s services.
Department of Justice ADA guidance
Government entities: ADA Title II
State and local governments fall under ADA Title II. In 2024, the Department of Justice issued a formal regulation requiring state and local government websites and mobile apps to conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA, with deadlines beginning in April 2026 for larger entities.
Even beyond this rule, Title II has long required “effective communication,” which includes digital access. The formal adoption of WCAG reinforces what courts and settlement agreements have already reflected in practice.
Section 504 and Section 508
Accessibility obligations also arise under:
- Section 504, which applies to organizations receiving federal funding
- Section 508, which governs federal agencies and procurement
If your organization receives federal funds or contracts with the federal government, accessibility requirements are part of that relationship. This includes many types of organizations, such as universities, nonprofits, and healthcare providers that participate in federal programs like Medicare or Medicaid.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – Section 504 information
The role of WCAG
Because the ADA does not define technical standards, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) have become the widely accepted benchmark. WCAG is a technical standard developed by the World Wide Web Consortium, not a statute. However, it has been incorporated into federal regulations, referenced by the Department of Justice, and routinely required in settlement agreements.
In practice, when accessibility disputes arise, WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 Level AA is almost always the reference point. WCAG 2.2 builds on 2.1 and reflects the most current published standard. From a business standpoint, accessibility conversations typically revolve around WCAG conformance.
Litigation reality for businesses
Website accessibility litigation remains active. Thousands of federal cases are filed annually, along with additional state-level claims.
Annual ADA website lawsuit trends are tracked by industry analysts and legal commentators at UsableNet.
Most cases settle. The reason is largely economic. Defending a case through motion practice can cost more than resolving it early.
Typical settlement structures include:
- A monetary payment
- A commitment to remediate to WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 AA
- Sometimes timelines or monitoring terms
Settlement amounts often reflect litigation economics more than moral fault. Factors such as the size of the business, perceived ability to pay, and the strategy of the plaintiff’s firm can influence outcomes as much as — or more than — the specific technical barriers involved. That reality does not diminish the importance of accessibility, but it helps explain why similar cases may resolve at very different numbers.
It is also true that a relatively small number of plaintiff firms account for a significant share of filings. For some firms, ADA website litigation is a concentrated area of practice. At the same time, private litigation has historically played a meaningful role in civil rights enforcement, particularly when federal agency enforcement fluctuates. The system is imperfect, but it has helped clarify that digital access falls within disability law.
Demand letters
Many disputes begin with demand letters rather than lawsuits. A demand letter is a private communication from a law firm alleging accessibility barriers and requesting remediation and financial settlement before filing suit.
Because demand letters are not public filings, they often surprise business owners. They function as pre-litigation settlement attempts. Many organizations choose to resolve issues at this stage rather than escalate to court.
Colorado-specific considerations
Colorado businesses operate under both federal ADA law and the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA).
Colorado Civil Rights Division
CADA provides a state-level enforcement mechanism. Complaints may proceed administratively before reaching court.
Additionally, Colorado House Bill 21-1110 requires state agencies and local governments to ensure digital accessibility.
While this law directly applies to public entities, it has influenced procurement standards and vendor expectations statewide.
For Colorado-based businesses:
- Federal ADA exposure still applies
- State-level administrative complaints are possible
- Public-sector contracts increasingly require accessibility conformance
- Procurement scrutiny is rising
Global accessibility expansion
Digital accessibility obligations are also expanding internationally. Laws such as the European Accessibility Act and Canada’s Accessible Canada Act extend accessibility requirements beyond the United States.
European Accessibility Act overview
These laws may apply based on where your customers are located, not just where your business is headquartered. A U.S.-based company offering goods or services to customers in the European Union, for example, may fall within the scope of EU accessibility requirements.
Overlays and quick fixes
Accessibility overlays and widgets are often marketed as fast solutions. They typically operate at the presentation layer and do not repair underlying structural barriers.
Overlays are frequently named in lawsuits. In 2024, the Federal Trade Commission fined accessiBe for deceptive marketing claims.
Federal Trade Commission enforcement action regarding accessiBe
Industry commentary outlining concerns about accessibility overlays can be found here.
An overlay may adjust appearance, but it does not make a site legally defensible on its own.
A practical approach
Accessibility does not need to be fear-driven. From a business standpoint, the most stable approach is proactive remediation:
- Run automated scans
- Conduct manual testing
- Prioritize critical user journeys
- Fix structural issues
- Integrate accessibility into ongoing maintenance
Digital participation is part of modern public life. The legal direction is clear: equal access applies there. Businesses that address accessibility early tend to reduce disruption, manage legal risk more effectively, and build stronger trust with their customers.
Sources and ongoing learning
This overview reflects publicly available legal commentary, case law, regulatory guidance, and industry reporting. It is informed in part by discussions from accessibility attorney Richard Hunt (Accessibility Craft podcast, episodes 114 and 119) and disability rights attorney Lainey Feingold (2026 Axe-Con US Digital Accessibility Legal Update webinar).
Lainey Feingold’s website also includes a wealth of resources.
Accessibility law continues to evolve, and staying informed through reputable legal commentary and agency guidance is essential. This portfolio highlights accessibility and UX work across healthcare, nonprofit, and professional services. From comprehensive audits to full website launches, each project reflects a practical, WCAG-informed approach to creating clear, inclusive digital experiences.
This information is provided for general educational purposes and is not legal advice.