ADA Web Accessibility Lawsuits in 2026: Trends and Prevention

What Is the ADA and How Does It Apply to Websites?

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law on July 26, 1990, as landmark civil rights legislation prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities. The ADA was originally drafted with physical spaces in mind -- stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, and other places where the public gathers. Title III of the ADA specifically prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in places of public accommodation, requiring businesses to ensure that people with disabilities can access the same goods, services, and benefits as everyone else.

When the ADA was enacted, the commercial internet did not yet exist. Congress could not have anticipated that within a few decades, websites would become the primary way millions of Americans shop, bank, communicate, learn, and access essential services. As digital commerce grew, disability rights advocates and the Department of Justice (DOJ) began arguing that the ADA's protections should extend to the digital world. The DOJ has consistently taken the position since at least 2010 that the ADA applies to websites operated by businesses that serve the public, issuing guidance letters and filing statements of interest in private lawsuits reinforcing this view.

The watershed moment came with Robles v. Domino's Pizza LLC, decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019. Guillermo Robles, a blind man who used a screen reader, sued Domino's after he was unable to order food through the company's website and mobile application despite multiple attempts. Domino's argued that the ADA did not apply to its website. The Ninth Circuit disagreed, holding that the ADA applies to the services of a place of public accommodation, not just the physical space itself. The Supreme Court declined to hear Domino's appeal, letting the Ninth Circuit ruling stand and sending a clear signal to businesses nationwide.

Since Robles, the trajectory has been unmistakable. Courts across the country have increasingly accepted that websites are subject to ADA requirements, and the DOJ has continued to pursue enforcement actions against businesses with inaccessible digital properties. For a deeper understanding of the technical standards that courts reference in these cases, see our guide on what WCAG 2.2 requires and how it builds on earlier versions of the guidelines.

Title III and Places of Public Accommodation

Title III of the ADA lists twelve categories of places of public accommodation, including hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, banks, hospitals, museums, schools, and professional offices. The statute uses broad language -- it covers any private entity that owns, leases, or operates a place of public accommodation. The critical legal question for web accessibility has been whether websites fall within this definition.

Federal courts have been divided on this question, creating what legal scholars call a circuit split. Some courts -- particularly in the First, Second, and Seventh Circuits -- have adopted a broad interpretation, holding that websites themselves can be places of public accommodation even without a connection to a physical location. Under this view, a purely online business like a streaming service or an e-commerce retailer with no brick-and-mortar stores is still subject to the ADA. Other courts -- notably the Eleventh Circuit in its 2021 decision in Gil v. Winn-Dixie -- have taken a narrower approach, interpreting Title III as limited to physical barriers at physical locations. Under this view, a website must have a nexus to a physical establishment to be covered.

The majority trend, however, is toward the broader interpretation. Most federal courts that have addressed the question in recent years have found that commercial websites serving the public are covered by the ADA. Businesses should not rely on the narrower interpretation to avoid compliance, as the legal landscape is moving decisively in the direction of broader coverage, and the DOJ's position supports this trajectory.

It is worth noting that the ADA itself does not prescribe a specific technical standard for web accessibility. There is no statutory text that says websites must conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA. However, courts have consistently looked to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines as the de facto benchmark for determining whether a website meets the ADA's accessibility obligations, and the DOJ has endorsed this approach in its rulemaking and enforcement actions.

The DOJ Title II Final Rule for Government Websites

In April 2024, the Department of Justice published its long-awaited final rule under Title II of the ADA, which covers state and local government entities. This rule, for the first time, codifies a specific technical standard into ADA regulation: state and local government websites and mobile applications must conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA.

The compliance deadlines are staggered by the size of the government entity. Large state and local governments -- those serving a population of 50,000 or more -- must achieve WCAG 2.1 Level AA conformance by April 2026. Smaller governments serving populations under 50,000 have until April 2028 to reach the same standard. These deadlines are enforceable, and noncompliant government entities face the prospect of DOJ enforcement actions and private lawsuits.

While the Title II rule applies directly only to government websites, its significance for the private sector cannot be overstated. By codifying WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the required standard for government websites, the DOJ has established a clear precedent. Legal experts widely expect that the DOJ will pursue a similar rulemaking under Title III for private sector websites, and courts hearing Title III cases are likely to reference the Title II standard when evaluating whether a commercial website is sufficiently accessible. Businesses that wait for a formal Title III rule to begin their compliance efforts risk being caught unprepared when lawsuits arrive -- as thousands of companies have already learned.

ADA Web Accessibility Lawsuit Trends in 2024-2026

ADA web accessibility lawsuits have grown steadily over the past decade, evolving from a niche area of disability rights litigation into one of the most active categories of federal civil rights enforcement in the United States. Understanding the trajectory of these lawsuits is essential for any business that operates a website.

According to data compiled by UsableNet, the number of ADA web accessibility lawsuits filed in federal court has increased dramatically since 2017. In 2018, approximately 2,314 federal lawsuits were filed alleging that websites or mobile applications violated the ADA. That number grew substantially in subsequent years, driven by increased awareness among plaintiffs' attorneys, the proliferation of digital commerce, and a series of favorable court rulings establishing that the ADA applies to websites. By 2023, annual federal filings had climbed to approximately 3,500, and 2024 saw that number surpass 4,000 -- representing roughly a 14 percent year-over-year increase.

The projection for 2026 suggests continued growth. With the DOJ's Title II final rule taking effect and the broader legal framework solidifying, accessibility lawsuits are expected to remain at elevated levels or increase further. Businesses that have not yet addressed their website accessibility are operating in an increasingly risky legal environment.

Lawsuit Volume by Year

The year-by-year trajectory tells a clear story. In 2017, approximately 814 ADA web accessibility lawsuits were filed in federal court. That number nearly tripled to 2,314 in 2018, a surge driven in part by the growing recognition among plaintiffs' attorneys that web accessibility claims were viable and potentially lucrative. Filings dipped slightly in 2019 to around 2,256, but the trend quickly resumed its upward trajectory.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in early 2020, dramatically accelerated the shift to digital commerce and services. As physical stores closed and consumers moved online, the importance of website accessibility became even more critical -- and so did the volume of lawsuits. Filings rose to approximately 2,523 in 2020 and continued climbing through 2021 and 2022. By 2023, the annual total had reached approximately 3,500, and 2024 saw filings exceed 4,000 for the first time. These numbers represent only federal lawsuits and do not include the significant volume of demand letters, state court filings, and complaints filed with the DOJ that never result in a federal lawsuit.

The post-pandemic landscape has settled at a permanently elevated baseline. Even as the initial pandemic-driven digital surge subsided, lawsuit volume did not return to pre-pandemic levels. The infrastructure of accessibility litigation -- specialized law firms, established legal precedents, and a large pool of potential plaintiffs -- ensures that filing volumes will remain high for the foreseeable future.

Most Targeted Industries

Not all industries face equal risk. E-commerce and retail businesses are by far the most targeted sector, accounting for an estimated 70 to 80 percent of all ADA web accessibility lawsuits. This is because online stores involve the most complex user interactions -- product browsing with images that need alt text, filtering and sorting mechanisms, shopping carts, and multi-step checkout flows that must be navigable by keyboard and compatible with screen readers. When any of these elements is inaccessible, it creates a clear barrier that forms the basis of a complaint.

After retail, the food service and restaurant industry is among the most frequently targeted. Restaurant websites often feature menus presented as images without text alternatives, online ordering systems with accessibility barriers, and reservation tools that are not keyboard-accessible. Banking and financial services also face significant exposure, particularly as online banking, account management, and financial transactions become increasingly digital. Travel and hospitality companies -- including airlines, hotel chains, and booking platforms -- are frequent targets due to the complexity of their search, booking, and itinerary management interfaces.

Healthcare and education round out the most targeted sectors. Patient portals, appointment scheduling systems, telehealth platforms, learning management systems, and course registration tools are all common sources of accessibility complaints. As these industries continue to digitize their services, their exposure to ADA lawsuits will only increase.

Serial Plaintiffs and Filing Patterns

A distinctive feature of the ADA web accessibility lawsuit landscape is the outsized role played by serial plaintiffs -- individuals who file dozens or even hundreds of lawsuits per year. Analysis of federal court records consistently shows that a small number of plaintiffs and their attorneys are responsible for a disproportionate share of all filings. In some years, the top ten plaintiffs by filing volume have accounted for more than 40 percent of all federal ADA web accessibility lawsuits.

The typical pattern begins with a demand letter sent to the business, alleging that its website is inaccessible and violates the ADA. If the business does not respond or fails to reach a satisfactory resolution, a federal lawsuit follows. Many of these cases settle quickly, with the defendant agreeing to remediate its website and pay the plaintiff's attorney fees. The economics of this model incentivize volume -- each case requires relatively little effort from the plaintiff, and the attorney fee awards, while individually modest, add up when multiplied across hundreds of cases.

Geographically, ADA web accessibility lawsuits are heavily concentrated in a few jurisdictions. New York, California, and Florida account for the overwhelming majority of federal filings. This concentration is driven by favorable state laws (New York, for example, has its own human rights law that provides additional remedies), large populations of potential plaintiffs, and established networks of plaintiffs' attorneys who specialize in accessibility litigation.

What Triggers an ADA Web Accessibility Lawsuit?

Understanding the specific accessibility failures that trigger lawsuits is essential for prioritizing remediation efforts. While the ADA prohibits discrimination broadly, the complaints filed in federal court consistently cite a predictable set of technical issues that prevent people with disabilities from using websites effectively.

Common Accessibility Failures Cited in Complaints

The most frequently cited failure in ADA web accessibility complaints is missing alternative text on images. When images lack alt attributes or have empty alt text where a description is needed, screen reader users receive no information about what the image conveys. For e-commerce sites, this means product images are invisible to blind users, making it impossible to make informed purchasing decisions.

Forms without proper labels are the second most common issue. When form inputs -- text fields, dropdowns, checkboxes, and radio buttons -- are not programmatically associated with visible labels, screen readers cannot communicate the purpose of each field. This makes it impossible for users with visual disabilities to complete contact forms, registration forms, login screens, and checkout flows.

Keyboard traps occur when a user navigating with a keyboard becomes stuck in a portion of the page and cannot move forward or backward. This is a critical barrier because many people with motor disabilities rely entirely on the keyboard to navigate. Modal dialogs, embedded media players, and custom interactive widgets are common sources of keyboard traps.

Other failures frequently cited in complaints include videos without captions or transcripts, which exclude deaf and hard-of-hearing users; insufficient color contrast between text and background, which makes content unreadable for users with low vision; inaccessible checkout and payment flows, which prevent users with disabilities from completing transactions; and missing skip navigation links, which force screen reader and keyboard users to tab through the entire header and navigation on every page before reaching the main content. Running your website through an accessibility scanner is the fastest way to identify these common issues before a plaintiff does.

Who Is at Risk?

The short answer is: any business that operates a website serving the public. However, the level of risk varies significantly based on several factors. Businesses with large digital presences -- especially those that conduct e-commerce transactions, offer online services, or maintain content-heavy websites -- face the highest risk. The more complex the user interactions on your website, the more likely it is that accessibility barriers exist.

Companies that have been previously sued for accessibility issues face an elevated risk of being targeted again, either by the same plaintiff or by a different one. Plaintiffs' attorneys actively monitor compliance after settlements, and a failure to maintain accessibility can result in a follow-up lawsuit. Small businesses are not immune. While large corporations attract more attention due to their visibility, small and medium-sized businesses are regularly named in ADA web accessibility complaints. The serial plaintiff model does not discriminate based on company size -- any inaccessible website is a potential target.

Landmark Cases and Settlements

Several court decisions have shaped the current legal landscape for ADA web accessibility. These cases have established important precedents that define the rights of plaintiffs, the obligations of businesses, and the standards courts apply when evaluating accessibility claims.

Key Federal Court Decisions

Robles v. Domino's Pizza LLC (9th Circuit, 2019) remains the most influential appellate decision in ADA web accessibility law. The Ninth Circuit held that the ADA applies to the website and mobile application of a business that operates physical locations that are places of public accommodation. The court rejected Domino's argument that imposing WCAG standards would violate due process, finding that the ADA provides sufficient notice that businesses must make their services accessible. The Supreme Court's decision not to review the case effectively endorsed the Ninth Circuit's reasoning and sent a powerful message to businesses nationwide.

Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores Inc. (11th Circuit, 2021) represents the other side of the circuit split. The Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court decision that had found Winn-Dixie's website inaccessible in violation of the ADA. The appellate court held that Title III's prohibition on discrimination in places of public accommodation is limited to physical barriers that prevent access to physical places. Under this interpretation, an inaccessible website -- standing alone -- does not violate Title III. This decision created significant uncertainty, as it directly contradicts the approach taken by most other circuits.

National Association of the Deaf v. Netflix (D. Mass., 2012) was an early and influential case establishing that a purely online service -- in this case, a streaming video platform -- could be a place of public accommodation under the ADA. The court denied Netflix's motion to dismiss, allowing the case to proceed and ultimately resulting in a consent decree requiring Netflix to caption all of its streaming content. This case was pivotal in establishing that ADA coverage is not limited to businesses with physical locations.

The circuit split between Robles and Gil v. Winn-Dixie remains unresolved by the Supreme Court, creating ongoing legal uncertainty. However, the clear majority of federal courts have adopted the broader interpretation, and the DOJ's consistent enforcement posture makes it risky for businesses to assume they are not covered.

Notable Settlements and Their Terms

Most ADA web accessibility lawsuits settle before trial. Typical settlement agreements include several standard components: a commitment by the defendant to bring its website into conformance with WCAG 2.1 Level AA within a specified timeline, usually 12 to 24 months; payment of the plaintiff's attorney fees; engagement of a qualified accessibility consultant to oversee remediation; periodic accessibility audits for a monitoring period of two to three years; and publication of an accessibility statement on the defendant's website.

Settlement amounts vary widely depending on the size of the company, the severity of the accessibility barriers, and the jurisdiction. Attorney fee awards in individual cases typically range from $10,000 to $30,000, but cases involving large corporations or class actions can result in significantly higher amounts. Some consent decrees also require the defendant to produce a Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) documenting the accessibility of its digital properties and to train its web development and content teams on accessibility best practices. The long-term monitoring and remediation obligations in these settlements often cost far more than the initial attorney fee payment.

The Cost of Non-Compliance

The financial and operational consequences of failing to meet ADA web accessibility requirements extend far beyond the immediate cost of a lawsuit. Businesses that ignore accessibility face a compounding set of expenses that make reactive compliance far more expensive than a proactive approach.

Legal Costs and Settlements

Defending an ADA web accessibility lawsuit typically costs between $10,000 and $50,000 or more in defense attorney fees alone, depending on the complexity of the case and the jurisdiction. Cases that proceed beyond initial settlement discussions and into discovery or motion practice can exceed this range substantially. In addition to their own attorney fees, defendants in ADA cases are often required to pay the plaintiff's attorney fees as part of the settlement -- typically $10,000 to $30,000 for individual cases.

The settlement payment itself is separate from attorney fees and varies based on the circumstances. Beyond the direct legal costs, businesses facing active litigation must often engage in emergency remediation -- fixing accessibility issues under tight court-imposed deadlines. Emergency remediation typically costs two to three times what the same work would have cost if undertaken proactively, because it requires accelerated timelines, overtime work, and the engagement of specialized consultants on short notice.

When all costs are combined -- defense attorney fees, plaintiff attorney fees, settlement payments, emergency remediation, ongoing monitoring, and internal staff time -- a single ADA web accessibility lawsuit can easily cost a business $100,000 or more. For companies that are sued multiple times, the cumulative cost can be devastating. By contrast, investing in proactive accessibility compliance -- conducting regular audits, remediating issues on an ongoing basis, and training development teams -- is a fraction of the cost and eliminates the legal risk entirely.

Reputational and Business Impact

The costs of non-compliance extend beyond direct financial expenses. An ADA lawsuit generates negative press coverage that can damage a company's brand and erode customer trust. In an era when consumers increasingly expect businesses to demonstrate social responsibility, being publicly identified as a company that discriminates against people with disabilities -- even unintentionally -- can have lasting reputational consequences.

Customer trust is difficult to rebuild once it is lost. People with disabilities and their families, friends, and advocates represent a significant market segment. According to the CDC, approximately one in four American adults lives with a disability. Alienating this population through inaccessible digital experiences is not only a legal risk but a missed business opportunity. Competitors that invest in accessibility gain a meaningful advantage by capturing customers who cannot use inaccessible competitor websites.

The regulatory environment is also becoming more complex globally. Businesses that fail to address ADA compliance may also find themselves unprepared for the European Accessibility Act, which imposes accessibility requirements on products and services sold in the EU market. Investing in accessibility now positions your business for compliance across multiple jurisdictions.

How to Protect Your Business from ADA Lawsuits

Protecting your business from ADA web accessibility lawsuits requires a systematic, ongoing approach. Accessibility is not a one-time project but a continuous process that must be integrated into your organization's development workflow and business operations. The following four steps provide a practical roadmap for achieving and maintaining compliance.

Step 1: Conduct an Accessibility Audit

The first step in protecting your business is understanding your current level of accessibility. Start with an automated scan using a tool like our free accessibility checker to identify the most common and easily detectable issues on your website. Automated scanning tools can quickly evaluate your pages against WCAG success criteria and produce a report of issues that need attention, including missing alt text, unlabeled form fields, insufficient color contrast, and missing document structure.

However, automated tools can only detect approximately 30 to 40 percent of all accessibility issues. To get a complete picture, complement automated scanning with manual testing. Manual testing involves navigating your website using only a keyboard, testing with screen readers such as NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver, and evaluating whether the content and functionality are understandable and usable without relying on a single sensory modality. Prioritize your audit efforts by focusing on the pages that receive the most traffic and involve the most critical user interactions: your homepage, product or service pages, checkout and payment flows, and contact or support pages.

Step 2: Remediate Critical Issues First

Once you have identified accessibility issues, prioritize remediation based on severity and impact. Start with WCAG Level A failures, which represent the most fundamental accessibility barriers. These include missing alt text on meaningful images, form inputs without associated labels, content that is not accessible via keyboard, and pages that lack a logical heading structure.

After addressing Level A issues, move on to Level AA failures, which include insufficient color contrast (minimum ratio of 4.5:1 for normal text), text that cannot be resized to 200 percent without loss of content or functionality, and interactive elements that do not provide adequate focus indicators. Pay special attention to checkout and payment flows, as these are the areas most frequently cited in ADA complaints. If a user with a disability cannot complete a purchase on your website, you have a clear accessibility barrier that invites litigation.

Step 3: Publish an Accessibility Statement

An accessibility statement is a public declaration of your organization's commitment to digital accessibility. While it does not provide legal immunity, it serves several important purposes. It demonstrates good faith to courts and regulators, provides users with disabilities a way to report barriers and request assistance, and establishes a public record of your accessibility efforts.

A strong accessibility statement should include your target conformance level (typically WCAG 2.1 Level AA), a candid description of any known limitations and the steps you are taking to address them, contact information -- including email address and phone number -- for users who encounter accessibility barriers, the date the statement was last reviewed and updated, and a reference to any third-party audits or certifications you have obtained. Publish your accessibility statement in an easily discoverable location on your website, typically linked from the footer of every page. Visit our about page to see how we approach our own accessibility commitment. Review and update your statement at least quarterly to ensure it remains accurate and current.

Step 4: Implement Ongoing Monitoring

Accessibility is not a one-time fix. Websites are dynamic -- new content is published, features are added, designs are updated, and third-party components are integrated. Each of these changes has the potential to introduce new accessibility barriers. Without ongoing monitoring, a website that is accessible today can become inaccessible within weeks.

Implement a multi-layered monitoring strategy. First, integrate automated accessibility testing into your CI/CD pipeline so that accessibility issues are detected before new code reaches production. Second, schedule regular automated scans of your live website -- at minimum monthly, but weekly is preferable for high-traffic sites. Third, conduct a comprehensive manual audit at least once per year, ideally with the involvement of users with disabilities who can provide real-world feedback on the usability of your site.

Finally, invest in training for your development, design, and content teams. Accessibility is most effectively and affordably maintained when the people building and updating your website understand accessibility principles and can apply them in their daily work. Document your monitoring processes, audit results, and remediation actions thoroughly. This documentation serves as evidence of your good faith compliance efforts and can be invaluable if your business is ever targeted by an ADA complaint.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I be sued under the ADA for my website?

Yes. Federal courts across the United States have consistently ruled that websites operated by businesses serving the public can qualify as places of public accommodation under Title III of the ADA. The landmark Ninth Circuit decision in Robles v. Domino's Pizza LLC (2019) affirmed that the ADA applies to websites and mobile applications that have a nexus to a physical place of public accommodation. Even in circuits that have not ruled definitively, the overwhelming trend is toward treating commercial websites as covered. Any business operating a public-facing website should assume it is subject to ADA accessibility requirements.

What accessibility standard do courts use for ADA cases?

While the ADA does not specify a technical standard, courts and the Department of Justice have consistently pointed to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA as the benchmark for web accessibility compliance. The DOJ's April 2024 Title II final rule explicitly requires state and local government websites to meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA, which strongly signals the standard that will be applied to private sector websites as well. Most settlement agreements and consent decrees in ADA cases require the defendant to achieve and maintain WCAG 2.1 Level AA conformance.

Which industries are most targeted by ADA web accessibility lawsuits?

E-commerce and retail businesses account for approximately 70 to 80 percent of all ADA web accessibility lawsuits filed in federal court. Online stores involve complex interactions -- product browsing, shopping carts, and checkout flows -- that are frequently inaccessible. After retail, the most targeted industries include food service and restaurants, banking and financial services, travel and hospitality, healthcare, and education. Any business with a significant digital presence is a potential target, but those conducting online transactions face the highest risk.

How much does an ADA web accessibility lawsuit cost to defend?

Defense attorney fees typically range from $10,000 to $50,000 or more, depending on case complexity. Defendants are often required to pay the plaintiff's attorney fees as well, typically $10,000 to $30,000. Settlement payments, remediation costs, and ongoing monitoring add further expense. Emergency remediation under litigation pressure costs two to three times what proactive compliance would have cost. The total cost of a single lawsuit can easily exceed $100,000 when all expenses are combined.

Does an accessibility statement protect against ADA lawsuits?

An accessibility statement alone does not provide legal immunity. However, a well-crafted statement demonstrates good faith and a genuine commitment to accessibility, which can be a meaningful factor in settlement negotiations and judicial proceedings. A strong statement should include your target conformance level (typically WCAG 2.1 Level AA), known limitations and remediation timeline, contact information for users encountering barriers, and the date of last update. When combined with active remediation and ongoing monitoring, it helps establish that your organization takes accessibility seriously. For more guidance on building an accessible web presence, explore our accessibility blog.