The ADA & Your Website: Legal Requirements in 2025

The Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted in 1990, prohibits discrimination based on disability. For decades, the ADA was applied primarily to physical spaces and employment. However, as commerce and communication moved online, courts began interpreting ADA requirements to apply to digital spaces, including websites. The ADA doesn't explicitly reference websites or WCAG standards. Instead, courts interpret the law's requirement that businesses provide "full and equal access" to mean that websites must be accessible to people with disabilities. Multiple court decisions have clarified that WCAG conformance, particularly Level AA, represents the practical standard for accessibility. The result is a complex legal landscape where organizational liability depends on website accessibility. Legal actions targeting inaccessible websites have increased dramatically, with 4,000+ lawsuits filed in 2024 alone. Most settlements result in substantial costs, though amounts vary by context. Organizations operating across multiple states face additional complexity. While federal law provides baseline requirements through the ADA, individual states have enacted their own accessibility mandates that may exceed federal minimums.

The ADA applies to private businesses, state and local governments, non-profits, and other covered entities with 15 or more employees. The law prohibits discrimination in all areas of public life, including access to goods and services. Title III of the ADA applies to private businesses and organizations that serve the public. It requires that goods and services be provided in a manner that provides equal access to people with disabilities. Courts have applied this requirement to websites, finding that inaccessible websites constitute a barrier to equal access. Title III applies regardless of organization size in many jurisdictions. Courts have applied it even to small businesses, particularly when the website serves a public function. Title II applies to state and local government entities. Government websites must be fully accessible, with limited exceptions. Non-compliance with Title II can result in significant legal exposure and regulatory action. While the ADA doesn't specify WCAG standards, courts and regulatory bodies have increasingly accepted WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the practical standard for compliance. Understanding this alignment is crucial: WCAG compliance translates to legal compliance in most contexts. Courts have established that Level A compliance alone is insufficient. Multiple decisions have found that websites meeting only Level A still violate the ADA. The legal trend moves increasingly toward Level AA as the minimum expected standard.

Section 508 applies specifically to federal agencies and federal contractors. It requires that information technology, including websites and software, be accessible to employees and members of the public with disabilities. Section 508 explicitly references WCAG 2.0 Level AA as the compliance standard. Federal agencies must meet Level AA conformance, and federal contractors serving agencies must ensure their systems meet these requirements. This makes Section 508 the most precise legal standard in accessibility compliance. If your organization is a federal contractor or serves federal agencies, Section 508 compliance is essential. Meeting Section 508 requirements typically satisfies ADA requirements.

Beyond federal requirements, many states have enacted accessibility mandates that may exceed ADA requirements. California has been particularly active in digital accessibility regulation. The state's Supreme Court has interpreted the Unruh Act (California's civil rights law) as applying to websites. California also enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act and the Online Privacy Protection Act, which have implications for accessible privacy controls. New York recently enacted the Digital Accessibility Law, which requires websites and mobile applications operated by private businesses to be accessible to individuals with disabilities. This applies broadly to all private sector websites in New York. Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, and other states have enacted or proposed accessibility legislation. Some require Level AAA compliance for public-facing services. Conducting research on applicable state requirements is essential for any organization operating in multiple states. Organizations serving European customers should be aware of the European Accessibility Act, which requires Level AA compliance for large organizations. The regulations took effect in 2025, making compliance increasingly important for global organizations.

The number of accessibility lawsuits has grown exponentially over the past decade. Understanding this trend is essential for appreciating organizational risk. Digital accessibility lawsuits have increased dramatically in recent years. Litigation activity has accelerated, with thousands of lawsuits filed annually targeting inaccessible websites and applications. This growth reflects both increased awareness and increasingly aggressive litigation strategies. Settlements in accessibility cases typically result in substantial costs. However, larger cases and class actions have resulted in even more significant outcomes. The litigation trend indicates that organizations cannot rely on small company status or obscurity to avoid legal exposure. Inaccessible websites have resulted in lawsuits against organizations across all industries: retailers, financial institutions, healthcare providers, entertainment companies, and educational institutions. Virtually no industry is immune. However, certain sectors face more litigation, including e-commerce, financial services, and entertainment. Many lawsuits are filed by plaintiffs or law firms specializing in accessibility litigation. Some cases involve individuals with genuine disabilities seeking access; others involve professional plaintiffs testing websites for violations. Regardless of plaintiff motivation, organizations cannot rely on perceived low violation risk to avoid compliance.

While the legal landscape is complex, practical compliance generally requires achieving WCAG 2.1 Level AA across your entire website. Private sector (ADA Title III): WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the practical standard. Some jurisdictions expect Level AAA for government contractors or organizations with significant public impact. Federal agencies and contractors (Section 508): WCAG 2.0 Level AA is explicitly required. WCAG 2.1 Level AA exceeds requirements but provides better accessibility. State and local government (ADA Title II): Requirements vary by state. Most expect at minimum Level AA; some require Level AAA. Compliance should extend across your entire website and all mobile applications. Partial compliance—where some pages meet WCAG standards while others don't—typically doesn't satisfy legal requirements. Courts expect comprehensive accessibility across all digital properties. Accessibility is not a one-time project. Legal compliance requires maintaining accessibility as your website evolves. New features, updated content, and design changes must all maintain compliance. Regression testing ensures that maintenance and updates don't introduce accessibility barriers.

While the best strategy is proactive compliance, understanding potential defenses helps organizations appreciate the legal exposure. The ADA allows entities to claim "undue hardship" if accessibility compliance imposes significant difficulty or expense. However, courts rarely accept this defense for website accessibility. Website accessibility is generally considered achievable with reasonable effort for most organizations. Some organizations claim that certain accessibility features are technically infeasible. Courts scrutinize these claims carefully. Modern accessibility techniques and frameworks make virtually all accessibility requirements feasible, eliminating this defense in most cases. Courts consider whether organizations made good faith efforts toward compliance. An organization can potentially reduce damages if it can demonstrate genuine commitment to accessibility, even if full compliance hasn't been achieved. This emphasizes the importance of documented accessibility efforts.

Beyond legal compliance, accessibility represents crucial risk management. The cost of accessibility remediation is substantially lower than the cost of litigation. Comprehensive accessibility auditing and remediation typically costs significantly less than typical settlement amounts. This cost differential alone makes proactive accessibility a sound investment from a purely financial standpoint. Beyond legal and financial considerations, inaccessible websites damage organizational reputation. Accessibility lawsuits receive media attention. Conversely, organizations demonstrating commitment to accessibility build reputation as inclusive and responsible. Approximately 1 billion people globally have disabilities. Accessible websites reach this entire market while inaccessible websites exclude it. From a business opportunity perspective, accessibility expands market reach.

Organizations seeking to achieve legal compliance should follow this approach: Begin with professional accessibility auditing to identify existing barriers. This audit should evaluate your entire website against WCAG 2.1 Level AA criteria. Not all accessibility issues have equal impact. Critical barriers affecting core functionality should be addressed immediately. Secondary issues can be addressed in phases. Create a realistic timeline for achieving compliance. Most organizations should target Level AA compliance within a reasonable timeframe for existing sites, with new features achieving Level AA before launch. Establish accessibility guidelines for your organization. Require accessibility testing as part of development processes. Train designers and developers on accessibility best practices. Use accessibility testing tools to identify regressions. Conduct periodic manual testing with accessibility experts. Maintain compliance as your website evolves. Maintain documentation of accessibility initiatives, testing results, and remediation efforts. This documentation supports good faith defense and demonstrates organizational commitment.