The legal framework, explained.

Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by private entities that own, lease, or operate places of public accommodation. Most federal courts treat commercial websites as covered, although the circuits differ on whether a physical nexus is required.

Courts disagree on whether a website needs a connection to a physical location. The Ninth Circuit requires one. Federal courts in New York generally do not, which is one reason so many cases are filed there. In the Eleventh Circuit, a 2021 ruling for Winn-Dixie was later vacated, leaving the question open.

Private plaintiffs can bring Title III claims. Federal Title III remedies are limited to a court order to fix the site plus attorney fees, which is why state civil rights statutes often drive the economics of filings. About 40% of federal Title III cases are now filed by people with no lawyer at all (Seyfarth Shaw).

Federal website accessibility filings rose 27% in 2025 to 3,117 (Seyfarth Shaw). The first half of 2026 was the busiest half-year on record, and filings counting state courts are on pace to pass 6,000 for the year (UsableNet).

Title II applies to state and local government entities. In April 2024, the Department of Justice finalized a rule establishing technical standards for Title II digital accessibility.

The rule names WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard for covered web content and mobile apps.

Title II applies to public hospitals, public schools and universities, city and county websites, and special districts. It also covers content a government provides through contracts, so vendors that build or run public-facing sites, apps and portals for them are pulled in.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits disability discrimination by recipients of federal funding. In 2024, the Department of Health and Human Services finalized a digital accessibility rule under Section 504 applicable to HHS-funded programs.

The HHS rule names WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard. Our Section 504 guide explains coverage and planning for healthcare organizations.

The rule reaches any organization that receives HHS funding, including Medicaid, CHIP and Medicare. Since 2024, HHS counts Medicare Part B payments as federal funding, which brings in most physician practices. HHS estimates that about 92% of doctors, 43% of dentists and all hospitals are covered. Human services programs funded by HHS grants are covered too.

Enforcement runs through the HHS Office for Civil Rights, which investigates complaints and can open compliance reviews on its own. The final step for an organization that will not fix the problem is the loss of federal funding. Individuals can also sue under Section 504 directly.

Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability in health programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

The 2024 Section 1557 final rule requires covered health programs to make their information and communication technology accessible, and it applies alongside Section 504 for most healthcare organizations. It does not set its own technical standard. In practice, the Section 504 rule's WCAG 2.1 AA is the benchmark.

Several states layer civil rights statutes on top of federal Title III. California's Unruh Civil Rights Act allows private plaintiffs to recover statutory damages of at least $4,000 per violation. New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law add their own private-right-of-action remedies with uncapped damages.

These state statutes, paired with federal Title III, drive the economics of the filings that flood the Southern District of New York and California state courts every week.

In 2025, New York led federal website filings with 1,021. Florida nearly doubled to 961. Illinois rose to 585, most of them filed by one Chicago firm (Seyfarth Shaw). California sees few federal cases because plaintiffs file in state court under Unruh instead.

State laws can also affect how website claims are handled. Talk to a lawyer about your situation before relying on a state-law defense. Fixing access barriers remains part of the work.

WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the technical standard currently specified by the DOJ Title II rule and the HHS Section 504 rule. Federal settlements and consent decrees commonly reference WCAG 2.1 AA.

WCAG 2.2 Level AA is backward compatible with 2.1 and adds nine additional success criteria addressing cognitive accessibility, mobile usability, and focus appearance. We work to WCAG 2.2 AA as a matter of course, which also satisfies any WCAG 2.1 AA requirement.

EN 301 549 is the European accessibility standard and aligns closely with WCAG 2.1 AA plus additional mobile and hardware criteria. US entities serving European users often reference it.