The Americans with Disabilities Act Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in places of public accommodation. While the ADA was enacted in 1990 — before the commercial web existed — courts have consistently applied it to websites and mobile apps operated by businesses that also have a physical presence or that constitute a public accommodation in their own right.
The legal standard courts use
There is no federal regulation specifying the technical standard for web accessibility under the ADA. However, DOJ guidance and court decisions have consistently pointed to WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the operative standard. In March 2022, the DOJ published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking citing WCAG 2.1 AA, and in 2024 published final rules for state and local government websites (Title II) requiring WCAG 2.1 AA compliance.
What plaintiffs typically allege
The most common allegations in web accessibility lawsuits are:
- Images without alternative text, preventing screen reader users from understanding visual content
- Videos without captions or transcripts
- Form fields without accessible labels, preventing users from completing transactions
- Keyboard inaccessibility, preventing users who cannot use a mouse from navigating
- Insufficient color contrast making content unreadable for users with low vision
- Pop-ups and modals that trap keyboard focus
The FTC action against accessiBe
In August 2024, the Federal Trade Commission took action against accessiBe — the largest overlay provider — for deceptive claims that its product makes websites fully ADA and WCAG compliant. The FTC found that overlays do not reliably fix underlying accessibility barriers and that marketing them as compliance solutions was deceptive. This action underscores that compliance requires fixing source-level code, not layering JavaScript overlays on top of inaccessible content.
Warning
Accessibility overlays do not constitute a legal defense. Courts and regulators have consistently held that overlays do not reliably fix the underlying barriers that screen reader users encounter.
What a reasonable compliance posture looks like
Courts and the DOJ look for good-faith, systematic efforts to achieve compliance. This means: conducting regular audits, maintaining an Accessibility Statement, having a documented remediation roadmap, and providing a contact mechanism for users to report barriers. Organizations that can demonstrate a continuous improvement program are better positioned than those with no documented accessibility activity.