UsableNet has tracked US digital accessibility lawsuits for years. Its 2026 midyear report, based on filings recorded to 14 June, projects roughly 6,176 lawsuits by the end of the year, a nearly 20 per cent rise on 2025 and a record. The count covers federal courts plus the key state courts in New York, California, Florida and Illinois. Here is what is behind the number and why it matters outside the US.

Who is being sued

  • E-commerce dominates. 79 per cent of suits in the first half targeted e-commerce sites, with food and beverage services the other heavy category.
  • Not just big companies. 68 per cent of suits involved companies with annual revenue under 50 million dollars. At the same time the share of defendants above 25 million dollars in revenue has grown steadily, from 27 per cent in 2023 to 33 per cent in 2024 and 36 per cent this year.
  • Widgets do not deter plaintiffs. UsableNet reports that lawsuits against companies already using accessibility widgets continue. If anything the toolbar signals that the owner knows accessibility is an issue.

Where, and by whom

New York still leads in total filings. The story of 2026 is Illinois, which has moved into second place on the back of state-court claims. Florida is the most active federal jurisdiction, and California remains a major venue. A small group of plaintiff firms drives most filings, with one, Equal Access Law Group, described as the single biggest driver of this year’s surge. UsableNet also notes that federal enforcement has slowed, through delays to the ADA Title II web rule and limited Department of Justice involvement, and that private plaintiffs and state courts have filled the gap. The full midyear analysis has the charts.

One state has pushed back. Missouri’s Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation (SB 907) takes effect on 28 August 2026 and introduces a 90-day cure period with fee-shifting against plaintiffs who sue after a defect has been fixed. Whether other states follow is an open question. So far they have not.

Why a UK or EU company should care

Title III of the ADA covers places of public accommodation, and many US courts have treated the websites and apps of businesses serving American customers as covered. Being based outside the US has not stopped demand letters arriving. A retailer shipping to the US, a SaaS product sold to US customers or an app in the US App Store is in reach. No technical standard is written into Title III regulations, but settlements and court orders have consistently referenced WCAG 2.1 Level AA, the same standard the Title II and Section 504 rules now mandate.

In Europe the enforcement track is different, driven by regulators and disability associations rather than plaintiffs’ firms, but the direction is the same. The Caen court’s June order against Carrefour, covered in our post on EAA enforcement, rejected a 71 per cent conformity score as inadequate. Both systems are converging on the same expectation: full WCAG conformance, documented.

Reducing the risk

  1. Fix the common failures first. The complaints in these suits are repetitive: missing alt text, unlabelled form fields, empty links and buttons, keyboard traps and inaccessible checkout flows. WebAIM’s 2026 data shows the same list across the top million sites (see our summary).
  2. Test the money path manually. Search, product page, basket, checkout and account, with a keyboard and a screen reader. Most suits are about not being able to buy.
  3. Publish an accessibility statement and a contact route, and answer it. Plaintiffs’ firms look for silence.
  4. Keep the evidence. Audit reports with dates, the issues fixed and the standard tested against. In the US it supports a defence. In the EU it is what the regulator will ask for.
  5. Do not rely on an overlay. A widget does not remove the failures a plaintiff’s tester will find, and the FTC’s 2025 order against accessiBe shows regulators take the same view of “automatically compliant” claims.

Try it this week

Run the Audit in Accessibility Checker on your checkout page and export the report as a dated PDF. Then read Why accessibility, which sets out the business and legal case in one place.

Back to Blog