web accessibility lawsuits Archives /Tag

How New U.S. Laws Could Change Accessibility Lawsuits

Accessibility lawsuits often start the same way. Someone flags barriers on your site, a letter arrives, and your team is asked to respond fast. That moment is rarely tidy. You are dealing with legal exposure, technical facts, and a customer experience problem at the same time.

Lawmakers are now proposing changes that could affect how these complaints move forward. Some ideas focus on requiring notice and a short remediation window. Others aim to define clearer federal website standards. States are also experimenting with ways to discourage filings they view as abusive. These proposals can change timing and paperwork, but they do not change what users face on the site today.

Below, we’ll take a closer look at the proposals taking shape and what they may suggest for future enforcement.

Why Lawmakers Are Pushing for Accessibility Reform

Across the country, lawmakers are responding to concerns that show up again and again when teams talk about demand letters and claims. Some are about cost and volume. Others are about uncertainty and inconsistent expectations.

The Pressure From High-Volume Filings

One of the strongest drivers is the rise in high-volume filings that reuse the same allegations with only minor changes. These accessibility lawsuits regularly target small and mid-sized organizations that already have limited time and budget to respond. Even when a team wants to do the right thing, the first step is often paperwork, outside counsel, and internal coordination.

Recent data shows how often the same organizations get pulled back in. In 2025, more than 5,000 digital accessibility cases were filed, and over 1,400 involved businesses that had already faced an ADA web claim. In federal court, about 46 percent of filings named repeat defendants.

Why States Point to Missing Title III Web Standards

Another driver is the long-running frustration with the Department of Justice’s lack of clear Title III web standards. States point to that gap when explaining why they are stepping in. Without federal regulations, expectations vary by jurisdiction. That creates uneven enforcement and room for conflicting court outcomes, even when the underlying barrier is similar.

Balancing Litigation Reform and Civil Rights

It is also important to recognize what private enforcement has done for access. Many of the improvements users rely on today came from individuals asserting their rights and pushing systems to change. Reform proposals often say they are trying to reduce opportunistic litigation without weakening civil rights. At the same time, some disability advocates warn that certain approaches can delay access if timelines stretch too far or if progress requirements stay vague.

Lawmakers are moving in different directions to tackle these concerns. That brings us to the next question.

What kinds of changes are actually being proposed?

Three Legal Changes Shaping Accessibility Lawsuits

Across federal and state discussions, most proposals about accessibility lawsuits fall into three categories. Each one could influence how demand letters work and how teams respond.

Federal Notice and Remediation Window Proposals

Some members of Congress have suggested adding a requirement that a notice be given before a lawsuit can proceed. Under these proposals, organizations would receive a written description of the alleged barrier and a short remediation window to show progress. One example is the ADA 30 Days to Comply Act. It outlines a written notice, a 30-day period to describe improvements, and an additional period tied to demonstrated progress.

A key nuance matters here. The bill focuses on architectural barriers at existing public accommodations. People often discuss these proposals alongside digital claims, but the text is narrower than many headlines suggest. Even so, the structure signals interest in early notice paired with proof of meaningful action.

Federal Website Accessibility Standards Proposals

Alongside notice concepts, Congress is also considering action focused on digital accessibility standards. The Websites and Software Applications Accessibility Act of 2025 aims to set uniform expectations for websites and applications. It also directs federal agencies to define standards, update them over time, and clarify how digital access fits within existing civil rights protections.

If a federal standard becomes established, organizations would have a clearer target to design and test against. That also means teams may have less room to argue that they were unsure what to follow. Day-to-day development, QA, and content workflows would matter more because compliance would depend on consistent results, not occasional one-time reviews.

State Laws Targeting Abusive Website Accessibility Litigation

Several states are exploring their own approaches. Kansas has already created a mechanism for determining whether website accessibility litigation is abusive. Courts can consider whether the business attempted to remediate issues within a set period and whether improvements occurred within a ninety-day window. Missouri has introduced similar bills built around notice, remediation timelines, and potential fee shifting for bad-faith claims.

These laws do not remove the obligation to maintain accessible websites. They focus on how courts should evaluate filings that appear designed for settlement volume rather than user access.

What May Change in Accessibility Lawsuits and What Will Not

These proposals could affect the process around accessibility lawsuits, but they do not change the core expectation that users need to complete tasks without barriers. It helps to separate what may shift from what stays the same.

What May Change

Organizations may receive more detailed notices that cite specific pages, steps, or interactions. Response timelines may tighten if new regulations define how quickly a team must respond or document progress. Settlement leverage could shift in places where remediation windows, presumptions, or fee-shifting concepts affect how cases are evaluated.

What Will Not Change

Users still run into barriers today. A delayed filing does not remove the barrier for someone trying to complete a checkout, submit a form, access account settings, or read essential content. If issues remain unresolved or progress is not measurable, legal action can still move forward. A remediation window is not extra time. It is a countdown.

Multi-State Website Compliance and Accessibility Risk

If your website serves users across the country, state-level differences create practical challenges. Exposure does not depend only on where a business is located. It also depends on where users live and which courts may have jurisdiction over a claim.

How State Approaches Differ

Florida uses a different model. Organizations can file a remediation plan in a public registry. Courts can consider this plan when evaluating good-faith actions and potential attorney fees in Title III cases filed within the state.

California has explored a small-business-focused approach, such as a 120-day window to fix issues before statutory damages or fees are available. These experiments show that states are testing different tools to encourage remediation and reduce rushed filings.

Teams need a repeatable way to keep their sites usable across many jurisdictions.

Remediation Windows and a 30-Day Response Plan

A remediation window helps only when teams can move with structure and focus. Without a workflow, the pressure to fix issues quickly can lead to patch-level changes that create new problems. A clear process prevents that and keeps everyone aligned.

Days 0 to 3

Capture the notice, save screenshots, and list the URLs and user steps cited. Assign a single internal owner who can coordinate legal, product, and development.

Days 4 to 10

Reproduce the issues on the named flows. Test with keyboard and at least one screen reader. Trace the problems back to specific components, templates, or vendor scripts so you can fix the causes, not just page-level symptoms.

Days 11 to 25

Run a focused remediation sprint. Prioritize barriers that block task completion. Involve design and quality assurance so that fixes fit your system and avoid new regressions.

Days 26 to 30

Retest the affected flows. Capture what changed, when it shipped, and how it was verified. Add any related systemic issues to your backlog with clear owners and target dates.

This type of workflow reveals the deeper tension behind many of these proposals. Reform can influence pacing, but the work of removing barriers remains the same.

Legislative Reform and Real Access

It is understandable that organizations want protection from high-volume filings that feel more like templates than tailored complaints. Responding takes time, budget, and focus, and many teams do not have much of any of those to spare.

At the same time, disability advocates warn that lengthy remediation windows can delay access. If the standard for demonstrating progress is vague, people with disabilities may wait longer for functional experiences. What matters most is that barriers get fixed and stay fixed.

This tension is unlikely to disappear. It will continue because expectations around digital access are rising.

How to Make Website Accessibility Sustainable

The most reliable way to reduce risk is to keep accessibility work steady and consistent. That includes defining a clear accessibility standard, often WCAG 2.1 AA in practice. It also means keeping a backlog that mirrors actual user journeys and testing flows, rather than focusing only on individual pages.

Build Around High-Value User Journeys

A backlog is most useful when it maps to tasks that support the business and the customer. That means prioritizing flows like navigation, product discovery, forms, authentication, and checkout, plus the templates and components that power them.

Prevent Regressions Between Releases

Development and content teams benefit from adding monitoring and release checks. This avoids regressions that might otherwise go unnoticed. Documenting testing steps, changes, and verification helps demonstrate good-faith progress if a notice arrives. For many organizations, reviewing vendor risk and third-party scripts is another important control point.

Track How Regulations Are Evolving

These practices are becoming more important as regulations solidify. The Department of Justice has already finalized its Title II rule for state and local governments. Although Title III remains unsettled, expectations around digital access are becoming more defined.

If you’re deciding where to start, focus on the tasks that matter most to users. Improving key tasks protects both customers and teams.

How Teams Can Stay Ready as Regulations Take Shape

As lawmakers continue shaping how digital access is defined, businesses deserve guidance that reduces confusion, not adds to it. Clear standards give teams room to plan, improve, and maintain their websites without fear of being caught off guard. They also help shift the conversation away from surprise claims and toward steady, predictable work that fits into normal development cycles.

If your organization wants help building a reliable accessibility plan that supports long-term stability, 216digital is here for you. Schedule a complementary ADA Strategy Briefing and let’s build a path that fits your team and your goals.

Greg McNeil

January 16, 2026

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, accessibility laws, Legal compliance, state accessibility laws, Web Accessibility, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility
A $5 Million Reality Check for Digital Accessibility
If you run a website, you probably know this routine. Digital accessibility is always on the to-do list, and everyone agrees it’s important. It comes up in planning, sometimes in design reviews, but then it often gets pushed aside for more urgent things like launches, campaigns, or new features.

Accessibility rarely feels like the thing that will break the business today.

That is, until a news story makes it impossible to ignore.

In Alcazar v. Fashion Nova, Inc., blind users alleged that the company’s website could not be used with screen-reading software, effectively shutting them out of browsing products and completing purchases. The proposed resolution included a $5.15 million settlement fund and a requirement to fix the site moving forward.

That number stopped people because it made the risk feel close. Not theoretical. Not “maybe someday.” It pushed a lot of teams to ask the questions they usually put off: Could this happen to us? How does a website problem become a multi-million-dollar issue?

This article explains what happened, why it was so expensive, and what you can do to keep your site accessible and protected.

What the Fashion Nova Settlement Signals for Digital Accessibility

Most accessibility cases end quickly. The company gets a letter, settles, and then fixes the issues. This case stood out because it was bigger, lasted longer, and involved more than one group of users.

Fashion Nova’s proposed settlement set up a $5,150,000 fund and included a commitment to make changes to the website so it would be accessible to legally blind individuals using screen readers. Fashion Nova also denied wrongdoing as part of the settlement terms, which is common in these agreements.

The way the case was set up is important because it explains why the financial risk increased.
- A nationwide class focused on forward-looking changes to the website.
- A California subclass focused on monetary relief tied to state law that allows statutory damages.
Most people focus on the $5.15 million, but the real lesson is what it stands for. Courts and plaintiffs now see online access as a serious matter, not just a small usability problem. When a retail site does not work for screen reader users, it can completely block them from shopping online.

Even if your organization is already working on digital accessibility, this case still matters. It shows how quickly putting things off can turn into a legal problem if barriers remain.

How the Case Turned Into a Digital Accessibility Class Action

The main issue in this case was simple. Blind users said the website was not compatible with screen-reading software, which kept them from using key parts of the experience.

If you have never seen someone use a screen reader to shop, problems can show up quickly.
- Product images may be announced as “image” with no helpful details.
- Buttons may be read as “button” without a label explaining what they do.
- Links may repeat or be empty, so the user hears a long list of unclear options.
- Popups and overlays can trap focus, preventing the user from moving forward.
- Checkout steps can fail because error messages are not connected to the fields.
When you use a mouse, none of these problems seem obvious. That is why they often go unnoticed for a long time.

What made this case more serious was how long it lasted and how many people it covered. Public summaries say it included a nationwide group for website changes and a California group that could get payments. This setup raised the risk and made the case more expensive to fight, even before any settlement was paid.

California adds another layer. The settlement notice describes payments to eligible California class members on a pro rata basis, up to $4,000 for a valid claim, depending on how many claims are approved. When statutory damages are part of the equation, the financial ceiling rises fast.

This is why teams should look at how a case develops, not just the final amount. When a case gets bigger and drags on, it stops being a quick legal problem. It becomes an operational problem that consumes time, focus, and money.

Why the ADA Applies to Websites in Practice

Many leaders still see the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as something that only applies to physical spaces, like ramps, doors, parking spots, and signs.

But for many businesses, the website is the front door.

Courts have increasingly treated websites and online services as part of how the public accesses goods and services, especially when the business sells to the public. In this case, the claims included the ADA and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which is one reason the settlement structure included a California subclass.

In practice, the legal question comes down to something simple: Can someone with a disability do the same basic things on your site as everyone else?

If a blind customer cannot search, browse, choose a product, and check out, their experience is not equal. That is exactly what the ADA is meant to fix, even online.

Why WCAG Became the Working Standard for Digital Accessibility

Teams often wonder: If the ADA does not give technical website rules, how do you know what counts as “accessible”?

In practice, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), became the common reference point because it is measurable. It gives teams clear criteria for things like text alternatives, keyboard access, labels, focus order, and error handling. It also gives auditors a shared way to evaluate what is working and what is failing.

That matters because vague goals do not hold up under pressure. Saying “we tried” is hard to prove. Following WCAG is easier to test, track, and defend.

This is also where many organizations get tripped up. They treat WCAG like a one-time checklist, run a scan, fix a batch of issues, and then move on.

But the sites that get into trouble usually have something else going on. Constant updates. Many hands touching content. Third-party tools are getting added without review. A brand-new design system that did not start with accessibility requirements.

As the site evolves, barriers reappear—both new ones and old ones you thought were resolved.

The Hidden Costs That Show Up Before a Lawsuit

Most teams do not mean to ignore accessibility. They just get caught up in the rush to keep the site running.

Risk often grows fastest in familiar environments.
- E-commerce sites with large product catalogs and heavy imagery
- Marketing sites with frequent landing pages and promotions
- Sites that use popups for discounts, chat, or cookie consent
- Platforms with filters, carousels, and dynamic menus
- Teams that rely on third-party plugins and scripts
In these setups, small mistakes compound. One missing label becomes a pattern across dozens of pages. One inaccessible modal becomes a blocker across major flows.

Then the human cost shows up.

A customer tries to make a purchase and cannot. They try again later and still have trouble. They contact support and get a workaround that takes extra effort. Over time, it starts to feel like the site was not made for them.

This is when reputational damage begins, even if no one posts about it online. The loss of trust starts long before any legal action.

Lessons You Can Apply Before Risk Turns Into Disruption

Here are the most important lessons for teams who know the basics and want a strategy that works over time.

Start With the Flows That Keep Your Business Running

Pick the tasks your customers must complete. Product search. Navigation. Product detail pages. Cart. Checkout. Account creation. Lead forms. Support contact.

If those flows work well with a keyboard and a screen reader, you are reducing the highest risk first.

Fix the Foundation Before Polishing the Edges

A strong baseline usually comes from a few core areas.
- Semantic headings that match the page structure
- Meaningful names for links and buttons
- Labels and instructions for forms
- Clear error messages that are connected to inputs
- Keyboard support for menus, modals, and interactive widgets
- Text alternatives for meaningful images and icons
These are just the building blocks that help users move through your site without getting stuck.

Treat Content as a First-Class Accessibility Surface

Many digital accessibility problems are content problems. Missing alt text. Vague link text like “click here.” Headings are used for style instead of structure. Images that contain key text with no alternative.

If marketing and content teams are not involved, the site can slip back into old problems, even after a big effort to fix things.

Audit on a Schedule and After Major Changes

Automated scans help, but they are not enough. You also need hands-on testing with real assistive technology. If you release updates often, add small checks to your process so you catch issues early.

Watch Your Third-Party Tools

One script can introduce a major barrier. Popups and overlays are common offenders because they can trap keyboard focus or hide content from assistive tech.

Treat vendor tools as if you built them yourself. Test them, test again after updates, and ask vendors tough questions before you launch.

Building an Approach That Stays Stable

Digital accessibility is easier to handle when it is not just a last-minute fix.

That usually means a few operational moves.
- Add accessibility acceptance criteria to tickets for new features.
- Include accessibility checks in design reviews, not just in QA.
- Build accessible components once, then reuse them.
- Document decisions so new team members do not repeat mistakes.
- Train teams in short, role-based sessions tied to real work.
This approach turns accessibility from a rushed fix into a regular practice. It also makes improvements easier to keep up with when priorities change. That is how digital accessibility becomes part of everyday work, not just something tracked in a spreadsheet.

When “Later” Becomes Harder to Ignore

The Fashion Nova settlement highlights a reality many teams now face. Online access is no longer optional for brands that serve the public. It is closely linked to civil rights, user trust, and legal risks that can grow if accessibility problems are not fixed. What seems manageable now can become much harder if those gaps are ignored.At 216digital, we can help develop a strategy to integrate WCAG 2.1 compliance into your development roadmap on your terms. If you are looking for clarity on where to start or how to strengthen what you already have in place, our team offers a complimentary ADA Strategy Briefing to help you move forward with confidence.
Greg McNeil

December 19, 2025

Web Accessibility Remediation

Accessibility, ADA, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, Unruh Act, Unruh Civil Rights Act, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility
AI, Pro Se Plaintiffs, and the Rise of Web Accessibility Lawsuits
Digital accessibility is no longer enforced only by regulators or a small group of plaintiff firms. AI tools now make it easy for individuals to prepare and file complaints on their own, and web accessibility lawsuits are following. Cases arrive faster, with less context, and often land on teams that are already stretched.

The expectation itself has not changed. If a website has barriers that stop people from completing tasks, those barriers still matter, and courts continue to treat them as significant. What has changed is how quickly issues can be turned into legal action. Understanding how AI-generated complaints are assembled and why they are showing up more often helps teams respond with more control instead of reacting under pressure.

The New Wave of Pro Se Plaintiffs Using AI

A growing share of accessibility cases are now filed by individuals representing themselves. In legal terms, these filers are pro se plaintiffs. Pro se litigation has existed for a long time, but its role in Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enforcement has expanded quickly.

In 2025, federal data shows a sharp rise in pro se ADA Title III filings, increasing about 40% over 2024 according to Seyfarth Shaw. This democratization of litigation means that anyone with access to a large language model and basic tools can generate a legally sufficient complaint, lowering the cost of entry that once required retaining an attorney.

For organizations, the enforcement landscape looks different from what it did a few years ago. Complaints now come from a larger mix of people and can appear in higher volume. Some raise legitimate barriers. Others arrive with long lists of issues that do not reflect how the site actually behaves. Either way, they require time, money, and attention from teams that rarely have extra capacity.

How AI-Generated ADA Complaints Are Built

AI-assisted complaints tend to follow a common pattern. The details vary, but the steps are similar.

Drafting the Complaint

A plaintiff starts by describing what happened and where. That narrative becomes a prompt. The AI tool returns a complaint with legal framing, structure, and citations modeled on previous filings. AI tools like ChatGPT and similar large language models can draft these complaints in minutes, generating legal language and structured allegations automatically.

Gathering “Evidence”

Free and low-cost accessibility scanners are used to crawl key pages. They surface potential barriers related to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and compile reports and screenshots.. These tools do not detect every barrier, and they can mislabel or overstate issues, but the output looks technical and complete. Those reports are often attached as primary exhibits.

Reusing Templates

Complaints that seem effective or are shared online often become templates. Names, URLs, and dates are updated, while large sections of text stay the same. This makes it easy to file similar complaints against many organizations with only small edits.

Filing Online

Electronic court portals allow filings to be submitted from anywhere. There is no need to schedule time with counsel or navigate in-person paperwork to start a case.

Taken together, these steps compress the process. Work that once took days or weeks can now happen in hours. For a small number of individuals, this efficiency makes high-volume filing possible. That is where many business owners feel the impact: not from a single complaint, but from the sense that they can be targeted repeatedly with little warning.

Red Flags That Suggest AI Played a Major Role

Courts and defense teams are starting to recognize patterns that often suggest heavy AI involvement. These signals do not automatically invalidate a case, but they can help teams decide what to verify first.

Common signs include:

Citations That Do Not Exist

Some complaints reference cases that cannot be located in any legal database.

Misstated Holdings

The case is real, but the description of what the court decided is wrong or misleading.

Compressed Timelines

Lengthy, well-structured briefs appear very quickly, especially from non-lawyers who have limited experience with legal drafting.

Generic Lists of Barriers

The complaint lists issues that do not appear on the site, such as CAPTCHA problems when no CAPTCHA is used, or components that the interface does not rely on.

Mismatch Between Writing and Presentation

The legal documents read as if prepared by an experienced litigator, whereas the filer’s explanation in court or correspondence is far less sophisticated.

Even when these patterns are present, judges still look at the underlying question: are there real barriers that prevent people from using the site? For organizations, the practical response is to separate signal from noise. That means confirming which issues are genuine, technical but low impact, or exist only because an automated tool misread the interface. Time and budget are better spent on changes that fix real problems than on chasing every line of AI-generated text.

AI as Assistive Technology Does Not Change Legal Duties

AI is also changing assistive technology. Screen readers and related tools now use AI to generate richer image descriptions, interpret layouts, and infer relationships between elements. For some users, these improvements make certain sites more usable than they were a few years ago.

That progress does not change the legal standard. ADA enforcement focuses on whether the website or application itself is accessible. People are not required to rely on advanced or paid tools to get around avoidable barriers.

If someone using a common screen reader, keyboard navigation, or magnification tool cannot complete a task because of missing labels, incorrect semantics, or inaccessible controls, the barrier still exists. AI support tools do not erase that responsibility.

Courts are also starting to respond when AI is misused in filings. Some federal judges have sanctioned litigants for submitting materials that include fabricated cases or inaccurate citations, and in certain matters have restricted the use of AI in court filings altogether. These responses are still evolving, but they show that judges are paying attention to how AI is being applied in litigation.

From a risk perspective, it helps to treat AI-powered assistive tools as a supplement. They may help some users, but they do not replace the need for accessible design and development. They also do not insulate an organization from complaints if basic tasks remain inaccessible.

Where Web Accessibility Lawsuits Are Landing

Early data from Useablenet’s 2025 mid-year report shows more than 2,000 digital accessibility cases filed in the first half of the year, with projections approaching 5,000 by year’s end. A growing share of these web accessibility lawsuits involve AI-generated or AI-assisted complaints.

Most of these cases are not evenly spread across the web. They cluster in certain industries and patterns:
- E-commerce and transactional experiences
  Close to 70% of cases involve e-commerce sites. Product discovery, cart, and checkout flows draw attention because they are easy to test and directly tied to revenue.
- Mid-sized organizations
  Around 64% of cases involve companies with annual revenue of less than 25 million dollars. These organizations often have lean teams and limited internal legal support. That can make them appear more likely to settle quickly, which in turn can attract more filings.
- Sites using widgets and overlays
  More than 20% of recent cases involve sites that installed an accessibility overlay. Complaints often point out that the overlay did not fix underlying issues in templates, components, or key flows.
For executives and product leaders, the pattern is clear. AI is amplifying enforcement in environments where business-critical experiences are not fully accessible and where teams do not have a strong, documented accessibility program in place. The risk is not only the presence of barriers, but the combination of barriers and a filing landscape that now moves faster and at greater scale.

Building an Accessibility Program That Holds Up

In this environment, the most effective response is not to plan around individual cases, but to build a program that stands up to both user expectations and legal scrutiny.

Core elements include:

Anchor on WCAG 2.1 Level AA

Courts and regulators continue to lean on this standard when they evaluate access. Using it as your baseline keeps internal expectations aligned with external review.

Use Both Automated and Manual Testing

Automated tools are useful for catching common issues early and monitoring regressions, but they do not see everything. Manual testing with screen readers, keyboard-only navigation, zoom, and voice tools gives a clearer picture of what people experience and highlights problems automation misses.

Prioritize Templates and Critical Flows

Start with navigation, search, account creation, forms, cart, and checkout. Improvements in these areas remove barriers that show up often in complaints and protect the journeys most tied to revenue and trust.

Integrate Accessibility Into Existing Workflows

Add practical checks into design reviews, code reviews, and QA. Keep them focused and repeatable so they fit into current processes. When accessibility is part of the way releases ship, it becomes harder for issues to build up unnoticed.

Document What You Are Doing

Keep records of audits, remediation work, training, vendor requirements, and standards for components and content. This documentation helps teams stay aligned and provides a concrete way to show effort if a demand letter or complaint arrives. Over time, this kind of documentation becomes one of the strongest defenses an organization can bring to the table when facing web accessibility lawsuits.

For leadership, this approach places accessibility in the same category as security and privacy: an ongoing operational responsibility. It also creates a clearer position when responding to AI-assisted complaints that blend legitimate issues with errors or overreach.

Responding When an AI-Generated Complaint Arrives

When a complaint comes in, whether clearly AI-generated or not, the first goal is to reduce confusion and avoid unnecessary escalation.

Helpful steps include:

Validate the Issues

Test the specific barriers named in the complaint. Sort them into groups: incorrect claims, technically accurate but low-impact issues, and serious barriers that block tasks. This makes remediation plans more realistic and gives legal teams better information.

Review Citations and References

Confirm that cited cases exist and that the summaries are accurate. Flag problems so counsel can address them with the court or opposing party.

Avoid Rushed Surface Fixes

Installing a new overlay or making untested changes can introduce new issues or send a signal that accessibility is being treated as a checkbox. Focus on changes that are tested, documented, and consistent with your broader standards.

Feed Lessons Back Into the Program

Use what you learn to update components, patterns, and checks. Close gaps in design systems and QA so similar issues are less likely to reappear.

Handled this way, a complaint becomes part of an ongoing process rather than a series of disconnected emergencies.

Reducing Risk in an Era of AI-Generated Web Accessibility Lawsuits

The pace and shape of accessibility enforcement are changing, and no organization is fully prepared for the speed that AI has introduced into the process. Even teams that care about accessibility and make steady improvements can feel caught off guard when a complaint arrives that was drafted quickly and filed with little warning. You are not alone in that experience. Every industry is adjusting to a landscape where expectations remain familiar, but the mechanics are new.

There is still uncertainty in how digital Title III claims will evolve, especially as AI lowers the barrier to filing. What organizations can control is how they operate. Maintain a steady accessibility practice, align with established standards, and document decisions and remediation. That combination does not eliminate risk, but it holds up far better than reactive changes made under pressure and gives you a stronger footing when facing web accessibility lawsuits driven by AI.

If you need support building that foundation, we can help.

At 216digital, we can help develop a strategy to integrate WCAG 2.1 compliance into your development roadmap on your terms. To learn more about how our experts can help you confidently create and maintain an accessible website that supports both your business goals and the needs of your users, schedule a complementary ADA Strategy Briefing today.
Greg McNeil

December 16, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, ADA Website Compliance, Web Accessibility, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility
ADA and Unruh Act: The Recipe for Huge Settlements
Over the past decade, more companies have been blindsided by accessibility lawsuits carrying price tags in the hundreds of thousands—or even millions. The culprit isn’t just the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In many cases, it’s the ADA combined with California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (Unruh Act).

Each law was written to protect people with disabilities and promote equal access. But together, they’ve become a powerful tool for legal action, especially in California, where plaintiffs can seek statutory damages. What often begins as a small accessibility oversight—a missing alt tag or an inaccessible entrance—can escalate quickly once both laws are involved.

This article breaks down how the ADA and Unruh Act overlap, why class actions magnify the risk, and what practical steps businesses can take to reduce exposure and protect their reputation.

Two Laws, One Powerful Combination

Understanding why this pairing leads to such large settlements starts with how each law operates.

The ADA: A Federal Baseline for Accessibility

Passed in 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act set the national standard for accessibility. It prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires that businesses, public agencies, and digital services be accessible to everyone.

Under Title III, that means:
- Removing barriers in buildings and parking lots
- Maintaining accessible routes and signage
- Making digital platforms—like websites and apps—usable with assistive technology
Violating the ADA generally results in a court order to fix the issue, not a payout to the plaintiff. That changes under California law.

The Unruh Act: California’s Added Layer of Risk

California’s Unruh Act goes further than the ADA. Enacted in 1959, it bans discrimination on many grounds—disability among them—and allows plaintiffs to claim statutory damages, usually $4,000 per violation.

Here’s where it becomes significant: under California law, a violation of the ADA automatically counts as a violation of the Unruh Act. That link gives plaintiffs the right to seek financial damages for what would otherwise be a non-monetary ADA claim.

In practice, one missed accessibility requirement in California can generate dual claims—federal and state—and quickly turn into a costly lawsuit.

When One Claim Becomes Hundreds: The Class Action Multiplier

A single violation may not break a company. A class action might.

Under the Unruh Act, damages apply per person, per incident. So if one user encounters an inaccessible website form, that’s $4,000. If 500 people encounter it, the number multiplies fast.

California courts often enhance damages further when multiple plaintiffs share the same experience. What starts as a small issue—such as poor contrast or an inaccessible navigation menu—can balloon into a multimillion-dollar settlement.

That’s why the class-action mechanism is considered the biggest financial threat for companies operating in or serving customers from California.

State-Level Accessibility Laws on the Rise

California may have started the trend, but other states are following suit. New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois have strengthened their accessibility laws in ways that complement or exceed federal standards.

Many of these laws now reference the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)—the same international standards used to measure digital accessibility. That means:
- Websites and mobile apps are increasingly part of compliance expectations.
- State and federal claims can overlap, increasing exposure.
- A single accessibility gap can violate multiple laws at once.
This expanding patchwork of regulations makes compliance more complicated. Businesses that operate nationally need to keep a close eye on both federal rules and the evolving state-level requirements that mirror the Unruh Act.

How Small Gaps Turn Into Large Settlements

Accessibility lawsuits rarely start with large systemic failures. More often, they begin with something small.
- A faded accessibility sign in a parking lot
- A checkout button that can’t be reached with a keyboard
- A product image missing alt text
Individually, these might seem like minor oversights. In California, they can qualify as Unruh Act violations and open the door to class actions.

Law firms that specialize in accessibility cases actively scan websites and physical locations for these gaps. And since digital platforms are constantly updated—with new themes, plugins, or content—accessibility issues can reappear even after remediation.

Practical Steps to Reduce Risk

Addressing accessibility proactively isn’t just a legal safeguard—it’s good business practice. The steps below can help reduce the likelihood of a claim under the ADA or Unruh Act.

1. Conduct Regular Accessibility Audits

Schedule audits for both your physical spaces and your digital properties. An experienced accessibility partner can evaluate:
- Entrances, parking areas, restrooms, and signage
- Website structure, navigation, and color contrast
- App functionality and compatibility with assistive tools
Audits help identify issues before they reach a courtroom.

2. Strengthen Digital Accessibility

Digital accessibility lawsuits are among the fastest-growing categories. To stay compliant:
- Follow WCAG 2.1 AA standards.
- Test with screen readers and keyboard navigation.
- Review every update—new features can reintroduce barriers.
Working with a web accessibility partner like 216digital ensures your compliance strategy evolves alongside your website.

3. Train Staff Across Departments

Accessibility shouldn’t live in a single department. Train employees—from developers to front-desk staff—to recognize and report accessibility barriers. Regular refreshers keep awareness high and prevent accidental noncompliance.

4. Create a Clear Response Plan

When someone reports an accessibility problem, how your team responds matters.
- Acknowledge the concern right away.
- Communicate a plan and timeline for fixing it.
- Document your actions.
That kind of transparency can resolve most issues before legal action begins.

5. Explore Legal Insurance

Insurance coverage for ADA and Unruh Act claims is becoming more common. While it shouldn’t replace compliance, it can limit financial exposure if a lawsuit does occur.

Staying Ahead of the Risk

The combination of the ADA, the Unruh Act, and emerging state-level rules has created a high-stakes environment for accessibility compliance. Class-action multipliers can turn one oversight into a major settlement, and the laws are only expanding.

But the solution isn’t fear—it’s preparation. Regular audits, team training, and ongoing monitoring make accessibility manageable and sustainable. More importantly, they send a clear message to customers: your business welcomes everyone.

At 216digital, we help organizations take a proactive approach to compliance—protecting them from risk while strengthening their commitment to inclusion.

If you’re ready to understand where your website stands and how to stay protected, schedule an ADA briefing with our accessibility team. We’ll walk you through your current risk level, outline a clear strategy for compliance, and help you build digital experiences that work for everyone.

Accessibility done right isn’t just about avoiding lawsuits—it’s about building a web that works for all.
Greg McNeil

October 28, 2025

Legal Compliance

ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, Unruh Act, Unruh Civil Rights Act, web accessibility lawsuits
How Small Businesses Grapple with Web Accessibility Lawsuits
For many small business owners, the word lawsuit evokes images of high-stakes corporate battles—teams of lawyers in conference rooms, million-dollar settlements, and brands big enough to weather the storm.

But in reality, the wave of web accessibility lawsuits sweeping across the U.S. often hits much smaller targets.

In recent years, small businesses—local cafés, independent retailers, family-run service providers—have found themselves on the receiving end of legal complaints claiming their websites are inaccessible to people with disabilities. These cases don’t usually come with a warning. They arrive as letters in the mail, full of legal language and urgent deadlines, leaving owners stunned and scrambling to respond.

Unlike large corporations with compliance departments and legal reserves, small business owners are often left to figure it out on their own—what went wrong, what the law actually says, and how to move forward without breaking the bank.

And while the circumstances can feel unfair, one truth is clear: web accessibility lawsuits aren’t going away. Understanding why they happen and what you can do to prevent them is the best way to protect your business—and your peace of mind.

Why Small Businesses Are Being Targeted

The Rise of Web Accessibility Lawsuits

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted in 1990 to prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities in public spaces. When it was written, the internet wasn’t yet a part of everyday life—but times have changed.

Today, many courts interpret websites as “public accommodations,” putting them under the same umbrella as physical storefronts. That interpretation has opened the door for an entirely new wave of lawsuits.

Some are filed by individuals who genuinely struggle to access websites using assistive technologies like screen readers. Others, however, are part of a broader trend: serial filings from the same plaintiffs and attorneys across multiple states. These suits often focus on small businesses because they’re seen as more likely to settle quickly.

To many business owners, it feels like an ambush. One day, you’re updating your menu or uploading new photos. Next, you’re being told your website violates federal law.

Why Small Businesses Feel It More

For large companies, web accessibility lawsuits might be just another line item in the budget. But for small businesses, even a single case can threaten financial stability.

Legal fees, settlements, and remediation costs can easily climb into the tens of thousands of dollars. That’s not counting the time and emotional energy spent dealing with it. Some owners describe the experience as “devastating,” especially when they didn’t even know they were noncompliant in the first place.

Part of the problem is clarity—or rather, the lack of it. There’s no single, government-issued checklist for web accessibility. While WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) serves as the global standard, it can be difficult to interpret for non-technical teams. This uncertainty leaves small businesses vulnerable to opportunistic legal action and inconsistent enforcement.

Common Accessibility Pitfalls That Trigger Lawsuits

Accessibility isn’t just about how your site looks—it’s about whether everyone can use it.

Here are the issues most commonly cited in web accessibility lawsuits:
- Missing alternative text on images leaves screen reader users without context.
- Low color contrast makes text hard to read for people with visual impairments.
- Missing or mislabeled forms prevent users from submitting contact or checkout forms.
- Keyboard traps, where menus or modals can’t be navigated without a mouse.
- Videos without captions exclude users who are deaf or hard of hearing.
- Inconsistent heading structures, which confuse those relying on assistive tech.
Each one might seem minor in isolation—but together, they can make a site frustrating or even impossible to use for some visitors. And in legal terms, that can be enough to establish discrimination.

The Danger of Reactive Fixes

When that demand letter lands, panic is a natural response. The instinct is to fix things—fast. But rushing into patchwork solutions can backfire.

Reactive fixes often lead to:
- Rushed, costly work. Under pressure, businesses may implement quick fixes or install accessibility overlays. These promise “instant compliance” but often introduce new accessibility barriers.
- Repeat lawsuits. A settlement doesn’t guarantee safety. If underlying issues persist, another plaintiff can file again.
- Operational disruption. Time spent dealing with attorneys and developers means less time running your business.
- Reputation damage. Web accessibility lawsuits can spread quickly online, leading customers to question your values or professionalism.
A reactive mindset puts out today’s fire—but it doesn’t build long-term resilience.

A Practical Path Forward

The good news: accessibility doesn’t have to be overwhelming or financially crushing. A thoughtful, steady approach can protect your business and make your site stronger for every customer.

1. Start with a Risk Assessment

You can’t fix what you don’t know. Begin with an accessibility audit to see where you stand.

Automated tools can catch obvious issues like missing alt text or broken labels, while manual testing—especially by someone familiar with assistive tech—uncovers deeper usability problems.

Focus on the most impactful changes first: navigation, forms, buttons, and media. You don’t need to be perfect on day one, but you do need a plan.

2. Be Wary of “Quick Fix” Tools

Accessibility overlays and plug-ins often advertise themselves as easy, one-click solutions. Unfortunately, courts have already ruled that these tools do not equal compliance.

They may mask issues visually, but they rarely address the root cause in your site’s code or structure. Instead, invest your time in meaningful remediation—updates to templates, alt text, ARIA labels, and keyboard navigation. Those changes last.

3. Make Accessibility an Ongoing Habit

Accessibility isn’t a box you check once—it’s a standard you maintain.

Treat it like any other part of your content process:
- Add alt text when uploading new images.
- Check contrast when designing new banners.
- Test your forms after updates.
By embedding accessibility into daily operations, you avoid regressions and build muscle memory for future projects.

4. Document Your Efforts

Intent matters. If you’re ever challenged, showing proof of good-faith efforts can go a long way.

Keep records of audits, remediation steps, developer training, or accessibility statements. These documents show that you’re working toward compliance—not ignoring it. Courts tend to look more favorably on businesses that can demonstrate ongoing commitment, even if their site isn’t perfect yet.

5. Bring in Expert Support

Some accessibility barriers—especially those involving ARIA attributes, dynamic content, or complex UI elements—require specialized expertise. Partnering with an experienced accessibility consultant or development team ensures your fixes are accurate, lasting, and compliant.

Think of it like hiring a professional accountant during tax season. You could try to do it yourself, but expert guidance saves you from costly mistakes later.

The Upside: Accessibility as an Advantage

Many businesses come to accessibility through fear of web accessibility lawsuits—but stay for the benefits.

Accessibility isn’t just risk management. It’s good business.
- More customers. Over 70 million Americans live with a disability, representing nearly $490 billion in disposable income.
- SEO gains. Search engines reward clear structure and descriptive text—two cornerstones of accessibility.
- Better user experience. Simplified navigation and cleaner layouts make your site easier for everyone to use.
- Future readiness. Accessibility standards continue to evolve. Starting now means you’re already ahead of the next update.
When you approach accessibility as an investment in usability—not just compliance—you build trust, credibility, and customer loyalty.

A Message of Reassurance

If you’ve been hit with a lawsuit or are afraid of one coming, take a breath. You’re not alone. Thousands of small businesses are navigating the same challenges.

Yes, the system can feel unfair. But accessibility itself isn’t your enemy—it’s your opportunity to create a better experience for everyone who visits your site.

With a proactive mindset, steady progress, and expert help where needed, you can reduce risk without draining your resources.

Small, consistent improvements go further than perfection ever will.

Support, Not Scrutiny—That’s Where Change Begins

Web accessibility lawsuits have created an uneasy environment for small businesses—caught between complex rules and opportunistic claims. But the way forward doesn’t have to be reactive or defensive.

By understanding common pitfalls, focusing on meaningful fixes, and committing to accessibility as an ongoing practice, you can move from uncertainty to confidence.

Accessibility isn’t about flawless compliance overnight. It’s about inclusion, usability, and respect—for your customers, your business, and your community.

When your website works for everyone, you’re not just avoiding lawsuits.

You’re building a stronger, more resilient brand—one that welcomes every visitor, every time.

If you’re unsure where to begin or want clarity on your current risk, 216digital offers personalized ADA briefings designed to help small businesses understand their obligations, assess exposure, and chart a practical path forward.

Schedule an ADA Briefing today and take the first step toward peace of mind and long-term compliance.
Greg McNeil

September 25, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Lawsuit, Small Business, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility
Digital Accessibility: A 2025 Midyear Reality Check
It’s only August, and 2025 is already shaping up to be a defining year for digital accessibility. The pace of change has picked up, not just in technology, but in the legal and business consequences of falling behind. According to Useablenet, a staggering 2,019 lawsuits have already been filed in U.S. courts alleging accessibility violations on websites and digital platforms as of July. That puts us on track to exceed 4,975 cases by year’s end—a 20% increase over 2024.

So what’s behind the uptick? And what does it mean for online businesses trying to stay compliant, competitive, and ahead of the curve? In this midyear report, we’ll look at the legal shifts, industry patterns, and common mistakes that continue to trip companies up—and where the real opportunities are to get ahead.

A Sharp Rise in Lawsuits: The Numbers and What They Mean

Let’s start with the numbers. The current legal landscape around digital accessibility is increasingly being shaped in the courtroom. With over 2,000 cases already filed, 2025 is pacing to be the busiest year yet.

What’s driving the surge? Several forces are at play:
- Federal enforcement is light, continuing a years-long trend of limited DOJ action, which shifts the burden to private plaintiffs.
- Legal uncertainty—especially at the federal level—has led to more lawsuits in state courts, where rules are less predictable.
- Strategic filings in state courts, particularly in New York, are on the rise. These courts offer more venues, a larger pool of judges, and sometimes more favorable rulings for plaintiffs. They’re also less likely to show what some call “judicial fatigue”—a phenomenon where federal judges grow weary of seeing repeated, similar claims.
Bottom line? We’re in an era where litigation—not legislation—is leading the way on enforcement.

Industries in the Crosshairs: Who’s Being Targeted Now?

E-commerce is still the top target, making up 69% of all digital accessibility lawsuits filed this year. That’s no surprise—shopping websites are complex, constantly changing, and directly tied to revenue, which makes them high-stakes for both users and businesses.

But some sectors are seeing sharp increases:
- Food Services: up from 11% in 2024 to 18% this year
- Healthcare: rising from 2% to 4%
- Fitness & Wellness: increasing from 2% to 3%
What’s Behind the Rise in These Sectors?

Several things are driving these jumps:
- Many of these sectors rapidly moved more services online in recent years—ordering, booking, telehealth, membership access—but didn’t always include accessibility in those updates.
- The accessibility of core functions—like scheduling a doctor’s appointment or ordering a meal—is especially critical for users with disabilities. When those experiences fall short, they attract scrutiny.
If your business is in one of these spaces, now’s the time to pay close attention.

The Widget Illusion: Overlays Aren’t Cutting It

Accessibility overlays—also known as widgets or toolbars—promise quick fixes. But in reality, they’re creating a false sense of security.

In March 2025 alone, 132 lawsuits were filed against companies using accessibility overlays. That’s not just a record—it’s a wake-up call. For comparison, the highest monthly total in all of 2024 was June, with 121 cases.

The issue is simple: overlays don’t address the real problems buried in your site’s code. They’re cosmetic patches, not functional repairs. Assistive technologies still can’t navigate many sites with overlays, and screen readers often don’t play nice with widget-driven content changes.

If you’re relying on a widget as your accessibility plan, you’re not just behind—you’re at risk.

What To Watch for in the Second Half of 2025

Looking ahead, the rest of 2025 isn’t likely to slow down. Here’s what’s coming:
- More state-level legislation: As federal rules stall, states may push their own accessibility laws. Businesses could face different standards depending on where they operate.
- Litigation as the main enforcement method: Until there’s stronger federal oversight, lawsuits will remain the most effective (and costly) way accessibility is being regulated.
- Overlays under a microscope: Legal and public pressure against widgets will likely continue to mount. Expect more headlines—and more lawsuits.
- Sector-specific crackdowns: Fitness, food, and healthcare industries are expected to see even more scrutiny in Q3 and Q4. If your digital presence in these sectors hasn’t been audited recently, now is the time.
Staying aware of these trends will help your business adjust before becoming part of next quarter’s data.

Staying Ahead, Not Just Staying Afloat

The first half of 2025 has sent a loud, clear message: digital accessibility can’t be an afterthought. The risks are growing, but so are the opportunities to do better—for your customers, your brand, and your legal standing.

This midyear checkpoint is a smart moment to pause and reassess. Are your current efforts truly accessible? Or just designed to pass a basic scan? Are you building for real users with disabilities—or relying on a shortcut that might leave you exposed?

Avoid being part of next quarter’s lawsuit stats. Start making real progress now.

At 216digital, we offer a free ADA briefing to help you figure out exactly where you stand. It’s not a sales pitch—it’s a chance to get clarity, ask questions, and understand your risk. From that foundation, we help you build a plan that fits your site, your team, and your timeline.

Because staying ahead in 2025 isn’t just about compliance. It’s about creating digital experiences that include everyone—and doing it with confidence.

Need a reality check on your accessibility efforts? Schedule your ADA briefing today. Let’s move forward—together.
Greg McNeil

July 28, 2025

Legal Compliance

2025, Accessibility, ADA Lawsuit, Web Accessibility, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility

What IS 5568 Compliance Really Means

If your website is available to users in Israel—and especially if you’re serving the general public—it needs to meet IS 5568. Whether you’re on a product team, working in UX, or leading development, this accessibility standard isn’t something to ignore.

But let’s be honest: trying to decode legal standards in multiple languages, cross-matched with WCAG, isn’t the most straightforward part of your job. So, this guide is here to break IS 5568 down into practical terms: what it is, where it came from, who it applies to, and what you actually need to do to comply.

Let’s start at the top.

What IS IS 5568?

IS 5568 is Israel’s national standard for digital accessibility. It’s based almost entirely on WCAG 2.0 Level AA—so if you’ve built for WCAG before, you’re already halfway there. The standard applies to websites, mobile apps, digital forms, and documents used by the public.

IS 5568 officially came into force in October 2017, but its origin goes back much further.

The Legal Backdrop: How IS 5568 Came to Be

In 1998, Israel passed the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law (ERPD). This landmark legislation aimed to promote equal participation in society, including for people with physical, sensory, cognitive, and mental impairments—whether permanent or temporary.

The Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CERPD) was established shortly after to enforce the law and help guide implementation. Over the years, digital access became a growing area of focus, especially after Israel adopted the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2012. That convention pushed member countries to make digital content—including websites and mobile apps—accessible to all.

With growing international and domestic pressure, Israel created a new committee that included accessibility experts, government officials, and advocacy groups. The result: IS 5568, a web accessibility standard aligned with WCAG 2.0 AA, tailored for Israeli audiences and legal frameworks.

Who Needs to Comply with IS 5568?

In short: any service that’s available to the public in Israel.

That includes businesses, non-profits, and government organizations across a wide range of sectors:

Education
Health care
Financial services (including banking, insurance, pensions)
Transportation
Entertainment and leisure
Hospitality and tourism
Utilities and telecom
eCommerce and retail
Social services
Cultural institutions
Religious organizations
Public agencies

If you operate a website or app that users in Israel can access—whether you’re based locally or internationally—you’re likely required to comply.

Business Size Affects Compliance Timelines

Business Type	Annual Revenue	Compliance Deadline
Medium and Large Businesses	≥ NIS 300,000	Immediately for new sites (after Oct 2017); Oct 2020 for older sites
Small Businesses	< NIS 300,000	October 2020
Private Contractors (Very Small)	< NIS 100,000	Exempt

Even if you’re technically exempt, meeting basic accessibility standards is still a smart move. A noncompliant site still limits your reach—and leaves room for reputational risk.

What Compliance Actually Looks Like

IS 5568 references WCAG 2.0 Level AA, so your technical benchmarks will sound familiar if you’ve worked in accessibility before. The standard is built around four core principles: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust—often shortened to POUR.

Here’s what that means in practical terms:

Alt Text: All meaningful images—product photos, icons, infographics—need descriptive alternative text for screen reader users.
Color Contrast: Body text should have a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1. Larger text or bold headlines need at least 3:1. Avoid pastel-on-pastel or light gray-on-white combinations (which are more common than you’d think).
Clear Form Labels: Every input needs a label. Placeholder text isn’t enough, especially for users navigating with assistive tech.
Keyboard Navigation: All interactive elements—menus, buttons, forms—must be usable with a keyboard alone. No traps, no dead ends.
Captions for Multimedia: Video and audio content must include synchronized captions or transcripts. This is especially important for Hebrew-language content, where auto-captioning tools may fall short.
Accessible Documents: PDFs and other downloadable files need to meet accessibility standards too. That includes structured headings, readable text, and keyboard support.
Ongoing Testing: Accessibility isn’t a set-it-and-forget-it situation. Sites need regular audits—especially after major content or design updates.

What Happens If You Don’t Comply?

Here’s where things get real.

IS 5568 is enforced under civil law. That means:

Individual lawsuits: Anyone with a disability can sue if your website is not accessible—even if they didn’t suffer financial or physical harm.
Class actions: Advocacy groups can file class-action lawsuits on behalf of affected users.
Statutory damages: Fines can reach up to NIS 50,000 per violation, even without proof of direct harm. That’s per violation—not per site.
Public exposure: Lawsuits and complaints often go public. Even if you resolve the issue later, the reputational damage can linger.

Unlike other countries where legal action often results in a court order to fix the problem, IS 5568 includes built-in penalties. That’s a big reason why enforcement has teeth.

Why It’s Worth Doing (Even Beyond the Law)

Let’s be clear: compliance isn’t just about avoiding lawsuits. It’s also good business.

Here’s why:

Reach a broader audience: Around 1 in 5 people live with a disability. When your site isn’t accessible, you’re unintentionally excluding a significant portion of potential visitors and customers.
Strengthen your SEO performance: Best practices like semantic HTML, alt text, and structured headings don’t just help screen readers—they also make your site more search-engine friendly.
Enhance the user experience for everyone: Intuitive navigation, clear labels, and legible typography benefit all users, not just those with disabilities. Accessibility often improves overall usability.
Stay ahead of future requirements: Meeting WCAG 2.0 AA now lays the groundwork for easier compliance with future versions like 2.2 and 3.0, which address mobile and cognitive accessibility in greater depth.
Demonstrate your values: Inclusive design communicates more than compliance—it signals empathy, forward thinking, and a genuine commitment to serving all users. That matters to customers, partners, and talent alike.

How to Start: A Practical Path to Compliance

Not sure where to begin? Start here:

Audit your current site: Use both automated tools (like WAVE or Google Lighthouse) and manual testing. Don’t forget mobile and document formats.
Prioritize fixes: Focus on the highest-impact areas: alt text, contrast, keyboard access, forms, and video captions. These issues affect usability—and risk—the most.
Embed accessibility into your process: Accessibility shouldn’t be an afterthought. Build it into your dev and QA pipelines, design reviews, and content workflows.
Test with real users: Include people with disabilities in your usability testing. Their feedback reveals gaps automated scans will miss.
Publish an accessibility statement: Transparency counts. Share your current status, your roadmap, and a way for users to report issues.
Keep checking in: Technology evolves. So should your accessibility. Set reminders for regular re-audits—especially before and after big launches.

Accessibility Under IS 5568 Is Within Reach

IS 5568 isn’t just a regulation—it’s a reflection of how digital services should work: for everyone. And while legal compliance is important, the real win is creating an experience that welcomes every user, regardless of how they navigate the web.

You don’t have to do everything at once. Start with the basics. Fix the critical gaps. Build accessibility into your process—not just your backlog.

And if you need help charting your path forward, 216digital offers briefings tailored to IS 5568 and WCAG requirements—designed to give your team a clear, practical roadmap, no legal jargon just free guidance that meets you where you are.

Because accessibility doesn’t have to be overwhelming. With the right approach, it becomes part of what you already do well.

Greg McNeil

July 14, 2025

Uncategorized

Accessibility, International Accessibility Laws, IS 5568, Legal compliance, Web Accessibility, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility

Why ADA Lawsuits Will Continue to Rise in 2025
The number of lawsuits filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has steadily increased over the past decade, and this trend is expected to continue in 2025. Businesses of all sizes, particularly those operating in the digital space, will likely face heightened scrutiny regarding their accessibility practices. Several key factors contribute to the continued rise in ADA lawsuits, from growing awareness of accessibility rights to the expanding scope of digital accessibility challenges. Understanding these drivers can help businesses proactively approach compliance and risk mitigation.

1. Growing Awareness of Accessibility Rights

One of the most significant reasons behind the rise in ADA lawsuits is the increasing awareness of accessibility rights among individuals with disabilities. As digital accessibility advocacy gains momentum, more users are recognizing their right to equal access to websites, mobile apps, and other online platforms. Organizations such as the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and the American Council of the Blind (ACB) continue to push for more stringent enforcement of accessibility laws, empowering individuals to take legal action when they encounter barriers.

Additionally, social media and digital forums provide platforms for users to share their experiences, amplifying the conversation around accessibility. As more individuals demand equal access to digital spaces, businesses that fail to comply with accessibility standards will become increasingly vulnerable to lawsuits.

2. The Rapid Expansion of Digital Technologies

The explosion of digital technologies, particularly in e-commerce and online services, has introduced new accessibility challenges. Many businesses are rushing to implement AI-driven interfaces, chatbots, and complex navigation structures without considering how these innovations impact users with disabilities. Common accessibility barriers include:
- Poor screen reader compatibility
- Inaccessible forms and checkout processes
- Missing or inadequate alt text for images
- Lack of keyboard navigability
- Videos without captions or transcripts
As businesses expand their digital footprints, accessibility must be a central consideration. However, many companies neglect to prioritize accessibility during development, leaving them exposed to potential litigation.

3. Legal Precedents and Heightened Enforcement Trends

In recent years, landmark ADA lawsuits have set powerful legal precedents, further fueling the rise in litigation. Cases like Robles v. Domino’s Pizza and Gil v. Winn-Dixie have reinforced that digital accessibility falls under the scope of the ADA. These rulings have emboldened individuals and advocacy groups to pursue legal action when accessibility barriers persist.

At the same time, regulatory bodies are stepping up their enforcement efforts. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued more explicit guidance on digital accessibility compliance, signaling that noncompliance will not be tolerated. With federal and state regulators increasing their scrutiny, businesses that ignore accessibility requirements risk facing significant legal and financial consequences.

4. The Impact of Accessibility Testing Tools

The evolution of accessibility testing tools makes identifying noncompliance easier than ever. Automated scanners, AI-driven auditing platforms, and real-world testing methods are providing users, advocacy groups, and legal professionals with concrete evidence of accessibility violations.

Tools such as WAVE, Google Lighthouse, and a11y.Radar enables quick and comprehensive assessments of digital properties. As these tools become more sophisticated and widely adopted, businesses that neglect accessibility will find it increasingly difficult to claim ignorance of their obligations. The ability to quickly identify accessibility failures means that potential plaintiffs have more substantial cases, further driving the volume of ADA lawsuits.

5. The Demand for Proactive Accessibility Compliance

With rising legal risks, businesses can no longer afford a reactive approach to accessibility. A growing number of organizations are recognizing the need for proactive accessibility strategies, including:
- Regular accessibility audits
- Compliance monitoring
- Employee training on digital accessibility
- Partnering with accessibility experts for remediation
Despite these efforts, many businesses still fall short due to a lack of knowledge or investment in accessibility initiatives. Those who fail to take proactive steps will face legal repercussions as accessibility enforcement intensifies.

The Time to Act on Accessibility Is Now

ADA lawsuits are projected to rise in 2025 due to growing awareness, digital expansion, legal precedents, and enhanced enforcement. Businesses must recognize that accessibility is not just a legal obligation but also a cornerstone of inclusivity and user experience. By taking a proactive approach to accessibility compliance, organizations can mitigate legal risks, boost customer satisfaction, and contribute to a more accessible digital world.

Now more than ever, it’s crucial for businesses to prioritize accessibility. Those who fail to do so risk costly lawsuits and miss the opportunity to build a more inclusive and equitable online presence. The time to act is now—and 216digital is here to help. Our team understands the complexities of ADA compliance and can guide you through every step of making your website accessible to all users. Contact 216digital today to learn how we can support your organization’s accessibility initiatives and help you stay ahead of rising ADA enforcement in 2025.
Greg McNeil

January 31, 2025

Legal Compliance

2025, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, ADA Website Compliance, web accessibility lawsuits
ADA Lawsuits Are Changing: What It Means for You
In 2024, digital accessibility became a critical focus for businesses as ADA compliance lawsuits revealed new challenges and risks. While the number of lawsuits stayed high, the strategies behind them shifted in surprising ways. These changes underscored the growing need for businesses to stay proactive, not just reactive, about accessibility.

Whether you’re a business owner, developer, or part of an e-commerce team, understanding these trends can help you avoid legal pitfalls and create a better online experience for everyone. In this article, we’ll explore how ADA compliance lawsuits evolved from 2023 to 2024 and share practical steps to safeguard your business.

The Rise and Shift of ADA Lawsuits for Websites

In 2023, there were more than 4,500 website-related ADA lawsuits—continuing an upward trend from previous years. By 2024, that number stayed significant, with over 4,000 filings. However, the real story lies in how these cases progressed. While federal lawsuits dipped slightly, state-level claims surged, catching some businesses off guard.

But where are these lawsuits happening most often? Understanding the geographic hotspots for ADA litigation can give businesses insight into where compliance is under the most scrutiny—and help them prepare accordingly.

Geographic Hotspots

New York again stood out as a hotspot for ADA lawsuits. Favorable state laws and a high concentration of plaintiff law firms contributed to a spike in litigation there. California remained a close second, largely due to its “physical nexus” requirement that often ties digital accessibility to brick-and-mortar stores. For businesses operating or selling in these states, the message was clear: staying ahead of accessibility standards is crucial to reduce legal exposure.

Widgets and Overlays Don’t Cut It

It came as no surprise in 2024 that accessibility widgets and overlays repeatedly fell short of their promises. Many of these so-called “quick fixes” only mask deeper barriers instead of truly solving them—an approach that inevitably leaves websites vulnerable to lawsuits. Over 1,000 businesses discovered this the hard way last year, getting hit with legal action despite having widgets in place.

Why Do Overlays Fail?

Widget typically offer superficial features like text-to-speech or color contrast settings, but they don’t fix the underlying coding errors—unlabeled buttons, broken forms, or improper heading structures—that truly affect users with disabilities. Plaintiffs and their attorneys have become more vigilant in spotting these shortcomings, and rightfully so. If a website is rife with barriers, a widget can’t make it magically accessible. Instead, a holistic approach that addresses root design and development problems is the only reliable way to ensure your site is inclusive and shielded from legal challenges.

Even beyond the issues with overlays, businesses faced another growing challenge in 2024: repeat lawsuits.

The Growing Challenge of Repeat Lawsuits

One of the most alarming trends of 2024 was the rise in repeat lawsuits. Around 40% of lawsuits targeted businesses that had already been sued. Yup, repeat lawsuits are on the rise, and they’re exposing a common problem.

Many companies settle a case, fix a few issues, and then move on. But if you only patch up one part of your site—or ignore your mobile app and subdomains—you’re leaving the door wide open for another round of ADA lawsuits.

The lesson here is pretty clear: you need a comprehensive approach to accessibility. That means reviewing every part of your online presence, not just the parts that got flagged before.

Why E-Commerce Websites Were the Hardest Hit

Just like in 2023, e-commerce businesses were a favorite target for ADA lawsuits in 2024. It’s not hard to see why.

Online stores change all the time—new products, fresh promotions, and constant updates. But every tweak and addition is an opportunity for accessibility issues to sneak in. If your product images don’t have alt text or your checkout page isn’t screen reader-friendly, you’re putting up barriers for customers.

And here’s the kicker: it’s easy for plaintiffs to prove harm when they can show they couldn’t complete a purchase because of these barriers. That makes e-commerce sites a prime target.

The takeaway? Prioritize accessibility. It’s not just about avoiding lawsuits—it’s about making shopping easier and more enjoyable for everyone.

What You Can Do to Avoid ADA Lawsuits

So, what’s the game plan for staying out of trouble? Here are some practical steps to help you avoid ADA lawsuits:
1. Audit Your Site Regularly: Use tools to check for issues like missing alt text, poor keyboard navigation, or inaccessible forms. And don’t stop at automated tools—manual checks are just as important.
2. Work With Accessibility Pros: Partner with experts who can guide you through the process of making your site compliant.
3. Educate Your Team: Train your developers, designers, and content creators on accessibility best practices. The more they know, the fewer issues they’ll create.
4. Involve Real Users: Test your site with people who use assistive technologies. Their feedback is invaluable.
5. Ditch the Widgets: Instead of relying on overlays, invest in long-term fixes that address the root of your accessibility challenges.
Accessibility: A Legal Requirement and a Moral Choice

The rise in ADA lawsuits from 2023 to 2024 proves that accessibility isn’t going away. If anything, the pressure to comply will only grow, especially with new guidelines like WCAG 2.2 and increased enforcement from the Department of Justice.

But accessibility isn’t just about avoiding lawsuits. It’s about making the internet a more inclusive space. When your website is accessible, you’re opening your doors to everyone, regardless of ability.

Don’t leave accessibility to chance. At 216digital, we specialize in helping businesses like yours navigate the complexities of digital accessibility. From comprehensive audits to ongoing support and monitoring through our a11y.Radar tool, we’ve got you covered. Let us help you stay compliant, reduce your risk, and create a website that works for everyone.

Take the first step today—schedule your ADA compliance consultation with 216digital. Together, we’ll build a more inclusive digital experience for your business and your customers.
Greg McNeil

January 23, 2025

Legal Compliance

2024 accessibility lawsuits, Accessibility, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility
2024 Accessibility Lawsuits: Trends and Lessons

2024 has been another big year for web accessibility—and not in a good way. More than 4,000 accessibility lawsuits were filed against digital properties this year, affecting businesses of all sizes. Whether you’re a small business facing your first lawsuit or a larger company dealing with repeat claims, the message is clear: ignoring web accessibility is no longer an option.

Despite the alarming rise in legal risks, the good news is that you can take practical steps to protect your business and create a better online experience for everyone. Below, we’ll examine the highlights of 2024, why they matter, and how you can get ahead in 2025.

Accessibility Lawsuits Are Shifting to State Courts

In 2024, over 4,000 accessibility lawsuits were filed—1,600 in state courts and 2,400 in federal courts. While federal cases dipped slightly, lawsuits in state courts surged, led primarily by New York and California. These two states accounted for more than 40% of all claims.

Why are state courts becoming more popular? State-specific legal frameworks and streamlined procedures may be giving plaintiffs an edge. For businesses, this shift means that federal-level compliance isn’t always enough—you must also stay aware of state-level requirements. Regular audits, attention to WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) updates, and a clear understanding of how your state enforces accessibility standards can help you stay ahead. Ignorance, as it turns out, is no longer bliss.

New York Is at the Center of the Action

New York isn’t just the city that never sleeps—it’s also the state that leads the nation in accessibility lawsuits. In 2024 alone, 2,541 cases were filed in its federal and state courts, surpassing even California.

What’s especially notable is New York courts’ willingness to hear cases against businesses with no physical presence in the state. If your website is accessible to New Yorkers, it’s open to potential litigation. Combine that with active plaintiffs and law firms focusing on accessibility, and you have a recipe for heightened risk.

Copycat Lawsuits Are a Growing Threat

One of the more frustrating trends of 2024 is the rise of “copycat” lawsuits. Out of this year’s filings, 961 cases—41% of all accessibility lawsuits—targeted companies that had already faced noncompliance claims in the past.

These repeat claims often happen when companies fix only part of their accessibility issues, leaving gaps that draw new lawsuits. New plaintiffs may target the same website, related brands, or even parent companies. The takeaway? Partial fixes can turn a one-time lawsuit into a recurring problem.

Small Businesses Are in the Spotlight

Historically, large corporations shouldered most accessibility lawsuits, but 2024 marked a shift. Small businesses—those earning under $25 million a year—were targeted more than ever.

There are two key reasons for this change. First, there are simply more small businesses out there, creating a bigger pool of potential defendants. Second, many large companies have been managing lawsuits for years and have implemented robust accessibility programs. With 82% of big companies already working toward compliance since 2018, plaintiffs are now focusing on smaller businesses that may have fewer resources or less awareness.

For small business owners, this trend can feel overwhelming. The silver lining is that you’re not alone, and even modest efforts can go a long way. You don’t need a massive budget to make your website more accessible—you just need to know where to begin.

Accessibility Widgets: Not the Quick Fix You Think They Are

If you’ve ever considered adding a simple “accessibility widget” to solve all your problems, you’re not alone—but this strategy might create more headaches than it relieves. In 2024, over 1,000 companies with widgets on their sites were still sued for accessibility noncompliance.

Why? Widgets often fail to address the deeper, structural issues that make a site inaccessible. In some cases, they even introduce new barriers, like interfering with assistive technologies or complicating site navigation for users with disabilities. Plaintiffs are increasingly calling out widgets as insufficient and pointing to WCAG violations or “band-aid” approaches that neglect larger accessibility gaps.

Relying on widgets alone could lead to a rude awakening. True accessibility requires meaningful changes to your site’s structure and content. This investment will reduce your legal risk and provide a better experience for all users.

What You Can Do in 2025

The prospect of a accessibility lawsuit is stressful, but there’s plenty you can do to minimize your risk. Consider these steps as you plan for the coming year.

Immediate Actions

Conduct a WCAG 2.2 Audit

Start by evaluating your site against the WCAG 2.1. Common issues include missing alt text, poor color contrast, and unlabeled form fields. Fixing these core issues can make an immediate impact.

Train Your Team

Accessibility isn’t a one-time project. Train your developers, designers, and content creators so that accessibility best practices are woven into everything they do. The more knowledge your team has, the fewer issues will arise.

Long-Term Strategies

Build Accessibility Into Your Workflow

Don’t wait until the end of a project to think about accessibility. Integrate it into each stage of development, from initial design to final testing. Known as “shifting left,” this proactive approach saves both time and money.

Partner With Experts

Accessibility is complex, and you don’t have to navigate it alone. Working with a team like ours at 216digital can help you stay up-to-date on guidelines and maintain ongoing compliance.

Conclusion

Yes, the surge in accessibility lawsuits is concerning. Yes, courts in states like New York and California are becoming more aggressive in penalizing non-compliant businesses. And yes, copycat claims mean one lawsuit can quickly snowball into multiple suits. However, this issue isn’t just about minimizing legal risk—it’s about building an inclusive internet that everyone can use and enjoy.

At 216digital, we strive to be more than just a service provider. Our aim is to be an ally, guiding you through the complexities of digital accessibility. Creating an inclusive website benefits your customers, your brand, and your legal standing. It might sound daunting at first, but that’s where we come in. Our step-by-step approach can help protect your business and empower a broader online audience.

The sooner you begin, the easier it becomes to get your site on track. So, let’s move forward—schedule a call with us, take that initial step, and start building a web experience that truly works for everyone. You’ve got this, and we’re here to help.

Greg McNeil

January 6, 2025

Legal Compliance

2024 accessibility lawsuits, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuits, web accessibility lawsuits, Website Accessibility

Why Lawmakers Are Pushing for Accessibility Reform

The Pressure From High-Volume Filings

Why States Point to Missing Title III Web Standards

Balancing Litigation Reform and Civil Rights

Three Legal Changes Shaping Accessibility Lawsuits

Federal Notice and Remediation Window Proposals

Federal Website Accessibility Standards Proposals

State Laws Targeting Abusive Website Accessibility Litigation

What May Change in Accessibility Lawsuits and What Will Not

What May Change

What Will Not Change

Multi-State Website Compliance and Accessibility Risk

How State Approaches Differ

Remediation Windows and a 30-Day Response Plan

Legislative Reform and Real Access

How to Make Website Accessibility Sustainable

Build Around High-Value User Journeys

Prevent Regressions Between Releases

Track How Regulations Are Evolving

How Teams Can Stay Ready as Regulations Take Shape

What the Fashion Nova Settlement Signals for Digital Accessibility

How the Case Turned Into a Digital Accessibility Class Action

Why the ADA Applies to Websites in Practice

Why WCAG Became the Working Standard for Digital Accessibility

The Hidden Costs That Show Up Before a Lawsuit

Lessons You Can Apply Before Risk Turns Into Disruption

Start With the Flows That Keep Your Business Running

Fix the Foundation Before Polishing the Edges

Treat Content as a First-Class Accessibility Surface

Audit on a Schedule and After Major Changes

Watch Your Third-Party Tools

Building an Approach That Stays Stable

When “Later” Becomes Harder to Ignore

The New Wave of Pro Se Plaintiffs Using AI

How AI-Generated ADA Complaints Are Built

Drafting the Complaint

Gathering “Evidence”

Reusing Templates

Filing Online

Red Flags That Suggest AI Played a Major Role

AI as Assistive Technology Does Not Change Legal Duties

Where Web Accessibility Lawsuits Are Landing

Building an Accessibility Program That Holds Up

Responding When an AI-Generated Complaint Arrives

Reducing Risk in an Era of AI-Generated Web Accessibility Lawsuits

Two Laws, One Powerful Combination

The ADA: A Federal Baseline for Accessibility

The Unruh Act: California’s Added Layer of Risk

When One Claim Becomes Hundreds: The Class Action Multiplier

State-Level Accessibility Laws on the Rise

How Small Gaps Turn Into Large Settlements

Practical Steps to Reduce Risk

1. Conduct Regular Accessibility Audits

2. Strengthen Digital Accessibility

3. Train Staff Across Departments

4. Create a Clear Response Plan

5. Explore Legal Insurance

Staying Ahead of the Risk

Why Small Businesses Are Being Targeted

The Rise of Web Accessibility Lawsuits

Why Small Businesses Feel It More

Common Accessibility Pitfalls That Trigger Lawsuits

The Danger of Reactive Fixes

A Practical Path Forward

1. Start with a Risk Assessment

2. Be Wary of “Quick Fix” Tools

3. Make Accessibility an Ongoing Habit

4. Document Your Efforts

5. Bring in Expert Support

The Upside: Accessibility as an Advantage

A Message of Reassurance

Support, Not Scrutiny—That’s Where Change Begins

A Sharp Rise in Lawsuits: The Numbers and What They Mean

Industries in the Crosshairs: Who’s Being Targeted Now?

What’s Behind the Rise in These Sectors?

The Widget Illusion: Overlays Aren’t Cutting It

What To Watch for in the Second Half of 2025

Staying Ahead, Not Just Staying Afloat

What IS IS 5568?

The Legal Backdrop: How IS 5568 Came to Be

What IS IS 5568?

The Legal Backdrop: How IS 5568 Came to Be

Who Needs to Comply with IS 5568?

Accessibility Under IS 5568 Is Within Reach