WebBuilding

Laws and standards

Americans with Disabilities Act and websites

Summary

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), signed on July 26, 1990, bans disability discrimination in areas that include state and local government (Title II) and businesses open to the public (Title III). It does not mention websites, but the Justice Department has said since 1996 that it applies to web content. In 2024 the department set WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the web standard for state and local governments, with deadlines that a 2026 rule moved to April 2027 and April 2028. No such rule exists for private businesses, and federal appeals courts have disagreed on how Title III reaches their websites.

Web Building Encyclopedia · Laws and standards · Last reviewed October 22, 2026 · 10 min read

What the ADA is

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a United States civil rights law that bans discrimination on the basis of disability. President George H. W. Bush signed it, as bill S. 933, on July 26, 1990.12 It became Public Law 101-336.1

The text of the law, including its later amendments, never mentions websites, the Internet or the World Wide Web.3 Every question about websites under the ADA is therefore a question about how older words apply to a newer medium.

The ADA is divided into five titles, each covering a different part of public life:4

  • Title I, employment. It covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions.4
  • Title II, state and local governments. It covers all their services, programs and activities, and also public transit.4
  • Title III, public accommodations. It covers businesses and nonprofits open to the public, such as restaurants, hotels, stores, schools and medical offices, as well as commercial facilities.4
  • Title IV, telecommunications. It requires telephone companies to let callers with hearing and speech disabilities communicate.4
  • Title V, other provisions. It covers matters such as a ban on retaliation and the award of attorney’s fees.4

Congress later broadened the law’s definition of disability in the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Public Law 110-325, dated September 25, 2008.3

Title II and Title III

Two titles matter most for websites, and they work differently.

Title II applies to a “public entity.” The statute defines that as any state or local government, any of their departments, agencies, special purpose districts or other instrumentalities, and Amtrak and commuter authorities.3 Its core rule says no qualified person with a disability may, because of that disability, be excluded from or denied the benefits of a public entity’s services, programs or activities.3

Title III applies to private businesses that operate a “place of public accommodation.” The statute lists 12 categories, lettered A to L. They run from hotels, restaurants, theaters and stores to banks, pharmacies, hospitals, museums, private schools, day care centers and gyms.3

The general rule of Title III bans discrimination in “the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations” of such a place.3 It also counts as discrimination a failure to provide “auxiliary aids and services” that a person needs, unless that would fundamentally change what the business offers or cause an undue burden.3 The statute’s own examples of auxiliary aids include qualified readers and taped texts for people with visual impairments.3

The list of 12 categories describes types of places. Whether a website that has no physical store behind it is a “place” at all is the question courts have split on, as described below.

The Justice Department and websites, 1996 to 2022

The Department of Justice (DOJ) takes complaints under Titles II and III and gives technical help on the law.4 The DOJ says it has consistently taken the position, since 1996, that the ADA applies to web content.5

The 1996 letter

The starting point is a letter dated September 9, 1996, from Deval L. Patrick, then Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, to Senator Tom Harkin. Harkin had passed on a constituent’s question about making web pages usable by people with visual disabilities.6

Patrick wrote that entities covered by the ADA that use the Internet to communicate about their programs, goods or services “must be prepared to offer those communications through accessible means as well.”6 He said that compatibility with Lynx, a web browser the constituent had suggested, was only one option.6

The letter listed others: offering web content in text format that screen readers can read, or offering the same information in other formats such as Braille, large print or audio, with instructions on the page for getting them.6

A rule proposed, then withdrawn

On July 26, 2010, 20 years to the day after the ADA was signed, the DOJ published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on web accessibility for both Title II and Title III.7 An advance notice is an early step that asks the public for comments before an agency writes a draft rule.

The notice asked which technical standard to adopt, naming the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the federal Section 508 standards as candidates. It also asked about limits on coverage, costs and compliance dates.7

On December 26, 2017, the DOJ withdrew both web rulemakings, with two others. It said it was still evaluating whether specific web accessibility regulations were needed and appropriate. It also noted that it had published no Title III web rulemaking since 2010.8

The 2022 guidance

On March 18, 2022, the DOJ published its Guidance on Web Accessibility and the ADA.5 It said that Title III requires businesses open to the public to give people with disabilities equal access to the goods and services they offer online. It also said businesses have flexibility in how they meet that requirement.5

The guidance said the DOJ did not have a regulation setting detailed web standards. It pointed to WCAG and the Section 508 standards as helpful guidance, and listed common barriers: poor color contrast, information shown by color alone, images without text alternatives, videos without captions, forms without labels or clear error messages, and pages that work only with a mouse.5

As of October 22, 2026, the guidance is still on ada.gov, with a note that it does not reflect the newer requirements for state and local governments.5

What the courts have said

Because no regulation set out Title III web rules, the question of how the law reaches websites has been argued case by case in the federal courts. The appeals courts have not all read the statute the same way, and the Supreme Court has not decided the question.

Robles v. Domino’s Pizza

Guillermo Robles is blind and browses the web with screen-reading software. He sued Domino’s after he tried at least twice, without success, to order a customized pizza through its website and app.9 On January 15, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Title III applied to both.9

The court reasoned that the website and app connected customers to Domino’s physical restaurants, which are places of public accommodation. The court called that link a nexus. Quoting an earlier federal decision, it said the statute applies to “the services of a place of public accommodation, not services in a place of public accommodation.”9

The court also rejected Domino’s argument that applying the ADA without DOJ technical standards violated due process, and it reversed the dismissal of Robles’s claims and sent the case back to the trial court.9 Domino’s asked the Supreme Court to review the decision, and the Court denied the petition on October 7, 2019.10

Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores

Juan Carlos Gil, who is legally blind, sued the Winn-Dixie grocery chain in 2016 because its website did not work with his screen reader. The site let customers request prescription refills for pickup in stores and link digital coupons to their rewards cards.11

After a bench trial, a federal district court in Florida ruled that the website violated Title III. It ordered changes that included conforming the site to WCAG 2.0.11

On April 7, 2021, a divided panel of the Eleventh Circuit vacated that judgment and sent the case back. The majority held that public accommodations are limited to actual, physical places, so a website is not one in itself. It described this website as having only limited functionality, since sales took place in the stores, and held that it was not an intangible barrier to Gil’s full and equal enjoyment of what the stores offered.11

The majority said it was joining the Third, Sixth and Ninth Circuits in reading Title III to cover only physical places, and it noted that the First and Seventh Circuits had read the statute differently. It also declined to adopt a nexus test. One judge dissented.11

The ruling did not stand. On December 28, 2021, the same court granted Gil’s petition for panel rehearing. Because the trial court’s injunction had expired while the appeal was pending, the case had become moot. The court vacated both its own opinion and the trial court’s judgment, dismissed the appeal, and told the trial court to dismiss the case as moot.12

The Supreme Court and hotel websites

The Supreme Court came close to a website case in Acheson Hotels v. Laufer. The plaintiff had sued hotels whose online booking information did not say whether they had accessible rooms, as a DOJ rule for hotel reservations requires, even though she did not plan to stay at them.13

On December 5, 2023, the Court held the case moot, because she had voluntarily dropped her pending lawsuits. It vacated the lower court’s judgment and ordered the case dismissed, without deciding whether she had the right to sue.13

The 2024 Title II web rule

For state and local governments, the question of a technical standard now has an answer. On April 24, 2024, the DOJ published a final rule adding a new subpart to its Title II regulations. It adopts WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard for the web content and mobile apps of public entities. The rule took effect on June 24, 2024.14

The rule covers state and local governments, their agencies, special purpose districts, Amtrak and commuter authorities. Governments must also make sure that contractors providing services for them meet it.15

It has exceptions for archived content, office documents and PDFs posted before the compliance date, content posted by third parties acting on their own rather than for the government, some individualized password-protected documents, and social media posts made before the compliance date.15

New compliance dates

The original rule gave larger governments until April 24, 2026 and smaller ones until April 26, 2027.14 On April 20, 2026, the DOJ published an interim final rule, effective the same day, that moved both dates back by about a year.16 An interim final rule takes effect before public comment, and the DOJ accepted comments until June 22, 2026.16

WhoOriginal dateNew date (2026 interim final rule)
Public entities with a total population of 50,000 or moreApril 24, 2026April 26, 2027
Public entities under 50,000, and special district governmentsApril 26, 2027April 26, 2028

Source for both columns: the DOJ interim final rule, 91 FR 20902.16 The ada.gov fact sheet on the rule carries the same new dates.15

The DOJ said it had overestimated the ability of covered governments, in staffing and in technology, to comply in the time the 2024 rule allowed. It also wrote that generative AI “does not yet reliably automate the remediation of inaccessible content at scale.”16

A search of the Federal Register on October 22, 2026 found no later DOJ rule changing these dates.17

The Title II rule covers state and local governments only.14 For private businesses under Title III, the DOJ’s guidance says it has no regulation setting detailed web standards.5

Lawsuits and enforcement

Website accessibility lawsuits filed in federal court are counted each year by the law firm Seyfarth Shaw. In a report published March 25, 2026, the firm counted 3,117 website accessibility lawsuits filed in federal courts in 2025, up 27% from 2,452 in 2024.18

Its yearly counts start at 814 in 2017 and have stayed above 2,200 a year since 2018. In 2025 the most cases were filed in New York (1,021), Florida (961) and Illinois (585).18

The same report counted 8,667 federal ADA Title III lawsuits of all kinds in 2025, about 36% of them about websites. Its numbers leave out cases filed in state courts and demand letters.18

What a private plaintiff can win under federal Title III is limited. The DOJ’s regulation lets a person sue for preventive relief, such as an injunction ordering changes. Money damages are available in suits the Attorney General brings, and the court may award attorney’s fees to the winning side.19

In suits the Attorney General brings, the statute also allows civil penalties of up to $50,000 for a first violation and $100,000 for later ones, amounts the regulations adjust for inflation.319 State laws can add other claims. Robles, for example, also sued under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act.9

The DOJ’s 2022 guidance lists its own web settlements. Under Title III they include Rite Aid, Teachers Test Prep, two H&R Block companies and Peapod. Under Title II they include Denver, Jacksonville, Durham, Miami University in Ohio, Nueces County in Texas and Louisiana Tech University.5

Automated tools sold as accessibility fixes have also drawn federal attention. On April 22, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission approved a final order requiring accessiBe to pay $1 million. The FTC had alleged the company’s claim that its accessWidget plug-in could make any website WCAG compliant was false, misleading or unsubstantiated. The FTC also alleged that accessiBe presented articles and reviews as independent without disclosing its ties to their authors.20

Timeline

  1. DOJ interim final rule moves Title II web deadlines to April 26, 2027 and April 26, 202816
  2. FTC approves a final order requiring accessiBe to pay $1 million over WCAG compliance claims20
  3. DOJ Title II web rule, using WCAG 2.1 Level AA, takes effect14
  4. DOJ publishes the Title II web content and mobile app rule14
  5. Supreme Court holds Acheson Hotels v. Laufer moot without deciding standing13
  6. DOJ publishes Guidance on Web Accessibility and the ADA5
  7. Eleventh Circuit vacates its Gil v. Winn-Dixie opinion as moot12
  8. Eleventh Circuit rules a website is not a place of public accommodation in Gil v. Winn-Dixie (opinion later vacated)11
  9. Supreme Court declines to review Robles v. Domino's10
  10. Ninth Circuit applies Title III to Domino's website and app9
  11. DOJ withdraws its Title II and Title III web rulemakings8
  12. DOJ asks for public comment on web accessibility rules for Titles II and III7
  13. ADA Amendments Act of 2008 broadens the definition of disability3
  14. DOJ letter to Senator Tom Harkin says covered entities' web communications must be accessible6
  15. President George H. W. Bush signs the ADA into law1

What it means for your website

This section is general information, not legal advice. Whether and how the ADA applies to a particular website depends on the facts and on where a case would be heard, so talk to a lawyer about your own situation.

  • Know which title is likely to apply. A business open to the public, such as a shop, restaurant, clinic or hotel, is generally a public accommodation under Title III. A city, county, school district or public college is a public entity under Title II, which now has WCAG 2.1 Level AA deadlines.315
  • If you work for a government, check your contract. The Title II rule reaches contractors that provide services for public entities.15
  • Use WCAG 2.1 Level AA as your reference point. No federal rule sets a web standard for private businesses, but the DOJ points to WCAG, and it is the standard the Title II rule uses.514 Our WCAG entry explains the levels.
  • Fix the common barriers first. The DOJ’s list is a good starting checklist: color contrast, color-only information, missing alt text, uncaptioned video, unlabeled forms and anything that needs a mouse.5
  • Run a first check yourself. The W3C’s Easy Checks walk through page titles, alt text, headings, contrast, text resizing, keyboard access, forms and media. The W3C warns that a page can pass them and still have serious barriers.21
  • Be careful with one-click fixes. In its 2025 accessiBe case, the FTC alleged that a widget maker’s claim to make any website WCAG compliant was false, misleading or unsubstantiated. A vendor’s compliance claim is a claim, not proof.20
  • Hotels and other lodging: the DOJ reservation rule at issue in the Acheson case calls for booking pages to describe accessible rooms and features in enough detail for guests to judge whether they meet their needs, so check yours.13

A redesign or a move to a new builder is a natural point to check new templates against WCAG before launch. Our web accessibility glossary entry covers the basics, and our guide to US website laws puts the ADA next to the other rules a small business site has to follow.

See also

References

  1. Public Law 101-336: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 327). U.S. Government Publishing Office, GovInfo. 1990-07-26. accessed October 22, 2026.
  2. Statement by the President: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. National Archives and Records Administration. 1990-07-26. accessed October 22, 2026.
  3. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, ada.gov. accessed October 22, 2026.
  4. Introduction to the Americans with Disabilities Act. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, ada.gov. accessed October 22, 2026.
  5. Guidance on Web Accessibility and the ADA. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, ada.gov. 2022-03-18. accessed October 22, 2026.
  6. Letter from Deval L. Patrick, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, to Senator Tom Harkin. U.S. Department of Justice. 1996-09-09. accessed October 22, 2026.
  7. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities and Public Accommodations (advance notice of proposed rulemaking, 75 FR 43460). U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Register. 2010-07-26. accessed October 22, 2026.
  8. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Notice of Withdrawal of Four Previously Announced Rulemaking Actions (82 FR 60932). U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Register. 2017-12-26. accessed October 22, 2026.
  9. Robles v. Domino's Pizza, LLC, No. 17-55504 (opinion). U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2019-01-15. accessed October 22, 2026.
  10. Domino's Pizza, LLC v. Robles, No. 18-1539 (docket). Supreme Court of the United States. 2019-10-07. accessed October 22, 2026.
  11. Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., No. 17-13467 (opinion). U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. 2021-04-07. accessed October 22, 2026.
  12. Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., No. 17-13467-CC (opinion on panel rehearing). U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, text via FindLaw. 2021-12-28. accessed October 22, 2026.
  13. Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, No. 22-429 (opinion). Supreme Court of the United States. 2023-12-05. accessed October 22, 2026.
  14. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities (final rule, 89 FR 31320). U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Register. 2024-04-24. accessed October 22, 2026.
  15. Fact Sheet: New Rule on the Accessibility of Web Content and Mobile Apps Provided by State and Local Governments. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, ada.gov. 2024-04-08. accessed October 22, 2026.
  16. Extension of Compliance Dates for Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities (interim final rule, 91 FR 20902). U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Register. 2026-04-20. accessed October 22, 2026.
  17. Federal Register documents search: Department of Justice, web accessibility, 2025 to 2026. Federal Register. accessed October 22, 2026.
  18. Federal Court Website Accessibility Lawsuit Filings Bounce Back in 2025. Seyfarth Shaw LLP, ADA Title III News and Insights. 2026-03-25. accessed October 22, 2026.
  19. 28 CFR Part 36, Subpart E: Enforcement. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR). 2026-08-13. accessed October 22, 2026.
  20. FTC Approves Final Order Requiring accessiBe to Pay $1 Million. Federal Trade Commission. 2025-04-22. accessed October 22, 2026.
  21. Easy Checks: A First Review of Web Accessibility. W3C Web Accessibility Initiative. accessed October 22, 2026.

Web Building Encyclopedia. First published October 22, 2026. Last reviewed October 22, 2026. Every fact on this page is linked to a source we opened. Spotted an error? Write to [email protected].