ADA Website Lawsuits Surge 37% in 2025: Legal Risks, Trends, and Business Impact

The litigation landscape for web accessibility has fundamentally shifted. What began as a niche legal concern is now a mainstream business risk that crosses industries, company sizes, and geographies. In the first half of 2025 alone, 2,014 ADA website accessibility lawsuits were filed—a 37% increase from the same period in 2024. By the end of 2024, the cumulative total exceeded 4,000 lawsuits filed that year alone. Since 2021, more than 25,000 lawsuits with digital accessibility complaints have been filed across U.S. courts.

For business leaders, this is not a theoretical risk. This is a concrete legal exposure that's accelerating, spreading geographically, and hitting businesses of all sizes. Understanding the current litigation landscape is essential for protecting your organization.

The Scale of the Problem: 2024-2025 Lawsuit Data

In 2024, over 4,000 ADA lawsuits related to digital properties were filed across state and federal courts. This represents continued growth in a decade-long trend of increasing digital accessibility litigation. Approximately 2,400 lawsuits were filed in federal courts and 1,600 in state courts. State court filings are growing in prominence, particularly in New York and California, which collectively account for 40% of all digital accessibility lawsuits.

In the first six months of 2025, litigation accelerated dramatically. Documentation shows 2,014 lawsuits filed between January and June 2025—meaning 2025 is on track to exceed 4,000 lawsuits for a full year. This 37% year-over-year increase suggests that digital accessibility litigation is accelerating.

This growth is concentrated. Just 31 plaintiffs and 16 law firms were responsible for half of all lawsuits filed in the first half of 2025. These plaintiffs and firms have developed sophisticated litigation strategies and infrastructure, hunting systematically for inaccessible websites and pursuing aggressive settlement strategies.

Geographic Concentration and State-Level Trends

ADA website accessibility litigation is not evenly distributed across the country. Certain states have become hotspots for litigation, and the landscape is shifting.

New York Dominance: New York remains the leading jurisdiction for ADA digital accessibility lawsuits. The state's courts accept cases against any website visited by a New York resident, regardless of company headquarters. This jurisdictional reach, combined with numerous plaintiff law firms with New York offices, makes the state uniquely litigious. By the first half of 2025, New York had filed 637 lawsuits, accounting for 31.63% of all filings.

Florida's Surge: Florida has experienced dramatic growth, climbing from 265 cases in 2024 to 487 in the first half of 2025—nearly doubling its volume and surpassing California to become the second most litigious state for digital accessibility.

California's Persistent Activity: California remains highly active. Courts have issued decisions that impact pure e-commerce defendants. California filings increased from 255 to 380 in the first half of 2025.

Illinois's Explosive Growth: Illinois experienced significant increases in ADA website accessibility lawsuits in the first half of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, suggesting coordinated litigation activity targeting Illinois businesses and representing a significant shift in enforcement trends.

Expanding Beyond Traditional Hotspots: Minnesota, Missouri, and Pennsylvania have seen increases, suggesting litigation is spreading geographically as more plaintiffs and law firms identify opportunities in underexplored markets.

Who Gets Sued: Industry and Company Size Targets

E-Commerce Dominance: E-commerce websites remain the primary target of ADA lawsuits, representing 77% of all 2024 litigation. Accessibility barriers are easy to identify and demonstrate during shopping transactions. Poor color contrast on product pages, missing alt text on product images, inaccessible checkout processes, and keyboard navigation barriers directly impact customer ability to complete purchases.

E-commerce businesses face particular risk because they frequently update features and content. Physical retail locations connected to e-commerce sites increase legal exposure. Their business model relies on digital transactions, making accessibility failures immediately apparent.

Company Size Distribution Shifting: In the first half of 2025, 36% of sued companies had annual revenue exceeding $25 million, up from 33% in 2024. This shift suggests plaintiffs are increasingly targeting larger companies with deeper pockets to settle lawsuits.

Industries Beyond E-Commerce: Lawsuits are spreading across industries. Healthcare providers face liability for patient portals. Financial services companies face lawsuits over banking portals. Travel, hospitality, media, and educational institutions all face exposure. No industry is exempt.

The Accessibility Widget Trap: Why Overlays Increase Legal Risk

One striking trend in 2024-2025 litigation is the explosion of lawsuits targeting companies using accessibility overlays or widgets. In 2024, 1,023 companies using accessibility widgets or overlays were sued—representing more than 25% of all website ADA lawsuits. That proportion continued climbing in 2025.

Many businesses installed these tools specifically to reduce legal risk, believing an overlay widget would shield them from lawsuits. The opposite has occurred—being identified as an overlay user appears to increase litigation likelihood.

Why Overlays Increase Legal Exposure:

Plaintiffs use overlays as evidence of knowledge. An accessibility widget suggests the company was aware accessibility is important but attempted a "quick fix" rather than addressing barriers properly. If underlying accessibility issues remain, plaintiffs can argue bad faith.

Overlays often create new barriers. These tools frequently introduce new accessibility problems through confusing accessibility settings and DOM modifications that break assistive technology compatibility. Plaintiffs can sue for barriers introduced by the overlay itself.

Overlays don't provide legal protection. Courts increasingly recognize that overlays don't achieve WCAG compliance. Regulatory attention has focused on leading overlay providers for making misleading compliance claims.

Plaintiffs specifically target overlay users. Plaintiff law firms have identified that overlay-using companies represent attractive targets because they've demonstrated concern about accessibility but failed to fix it properly.

The Repeat Litigation Trap: Being Sued Multiple Times

In 2024, 41% of federal court cases filed were against companies that had been sued for accessibility violations before. Companies received 961 repeat lawsuits, representing over 40% of all cases.

This creates a vicious cycle: A company is sued for accessibility violations. They settle. Yet they don't comprehensively fix the underlying accessibility issues. Months or years later, new plaintiffs discover the same (or different) accessibility barriers. The company is sued again.

Why does this happen? Companies may make targeted fixes to specific barriers cited in the original lawsuit but fail to address broader issues. They may implement an accessibility overlay as a "band-aid." They may fail to establish systematic accessibility processes to prevent new barriers from being introduced as the site is updated.

The repeat litigation problem is so pervasive that some companies budget for ongoing settlements with new plaintiffs. This is not a sustainable strategy—and it destroys the company's reputation and customer relationships.

The Financial Reality: Settlement Amounts and Costs

Settlement amounts vary widely depending on company size, scope of violations, and negotiating dynamics, but the data paints a picture of substantial financial exposure.

Individual Settlements: Publicly disclosed settlements have ranged from tens of thousands to millions of dollars. Major retailers have settled for seven figures. Financial services companies have paid significant sums. Even smaller companies typically settle for amounts that exceed their accessibility remediation costs.

Hidden Costs Beyond Settlement: The direct settlement is only part of the cost. Companies must also pay attorney's fees, expert witnesses, document discovery costs, litigation management, and factor in reputational damage. Many companies report that the total cost of handling an accessibility lawsuit—including legal fees, settlement, and internal costs—exceeds the settlement amount itself.

Serial Litigation Cost: For companies hit with multiple lawsuits, cumulative costs become staggering. A company sued four or five times can face settlement costs in the millions, plus legal fees and management time.

The Compliance Standard: WCAG 2.1 AA

Lawsuits are typically filed citing failure to meet Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. Most federal cases reference WCAG 2.1 AA compliance as the standard, though some plaintiffs pursue claims based on AAA (higher) standards. Several state courts are also recognizing state-specific accessibility laws that add additional compliance obligations.

The Department of Justice's ADA Title II final rule will require state and local governments to conform to WCAG 2.1 AA by April 2026. This deadline will likely expand litigation as agencies work to meet requirements.

Legal Defense Challenges and Jurisdictional Issues

Physical Nexus Questions: There has been ongoing debate about whether the ADA applies to websites. Recent court decisions have clarified this somewhat, but significant uncertainty remains based on jurisdiction and business model. Businesses should understand their specific legal exposure.

Forum Shopping. Plaintiff law firms strategically choose venues. Different federal circuits have different approaches. Plaintiffs file in jurisdictions where they believe their claims will receive favorable consideration.

Serial Plaintiff Litigation. Certain plaintiffs have become extremely prolific, accounting for a significant percentage of all digital accessibility lawsuits. This concentration suggests the litigation is driven by sophisticated plaintiff strategies rather than comprehensive enforcement.

Reducing Legal Exposure: What Businesses Should Do Now

1. Conduct a Comprehensive Manual WCAG Audit

Don't rely on automated scanning tools alone. A comprehensive manual audit by accessibility experts is essential. This audit should identify all WCAG 2.1 AA violations.

2. Avoid Accessibility Overlays and Widgets

If your website currently uses an accessibility overlay or widget, seriously consider removing it. These tools increase rather than decrease litigation risk. Replace the overlay with actual remediation of accessibility issues.

3. Prioritize Remediation Based on Impact

Once you know what needs fixing, prioritize based on impact. Color contrast failures affect many vision-impaired users. Missing alt text on critical product images affects blind users' ability to shop. Keyboard navigation failures affect multiple disability types. Focus first on barriers with the greatest user impact.

4. Act Quickly After Receiving a Demand Letter or Lawsuit

If you receive a demand letter or are sued, take it seriously and respond promptly. Companies that address accessibility issues quickly after a first lawsuit are significantly less likely to face repeat litigation.

5. Establish Ongoing Accessibility Processes

Accessibility isn't a one-time fix. It requires ongoing processes: developer training, accessibility review of new features before launch, regular audits to catch new issues, and a culture that prioritizes inclusion.

6. Document Your Good Faith Efforts

Document your accessibility audit, remediation efforts, training, governance processes, and commitment to ongoing improvement. While documentation doesn't prevent lawsuits, it can help in defense.

2025 and Beyond: The Litigation Trajectory

Several factors suggest that accessibility litigation will continue to escalate: The April 2026 Title II deadline will force government agencies to undertake major compliance efforts, likely exposing widespread non-compliance and sparking additional litigation. Plaintiff law firms have perfected their litigation infrastructure and continue to expand geographically. Courts have become increasingly receptive to these cases. More businesses are adopting digital engagement, creating larger attack surfaces for plaintiffs. New web technologies and AI create new accessibility challenges that websites haven't yet adapted to.

For business leaders, the message is clear: the days of ignoring web accessibility are over. The financial, legal, and reputational costs of non-compliance are real and measurable. Organizations that prioritize genuine accessibility today will avoid the substantially higher costs of litigation tomorrow.