RatedWithAI
Accessibility scanner
ADA Lawsuit Reform 2026: States Push Back Against Abusive Accessibility Litigation
In 2025, 8,667 federal ADA Title III lawsuits were filed across the United States — the highest number on record. Now, states are fighting back. Missouri and Utah have introduced landmark bills that would fundamentally change how ADA web accessibility lawsuits work, giving businesses a chance to fix violations before facing legal action. Here's what's happening, why it matters, and what you should do.
The ADA Lawsuit Landscape: 2025 in Numbers
According to Seyfarth Shaw, the most authoritative source for ADA Title III litigation data, 8,667 federal ADA Title III lawsuits were filed in 2025 — a slight decrease of 2% from the 8,800 filed in 2024, but still near the all-time high. These numbers tell a story of an enforcement ecosystem that shows no signs of slowing down.
Source: Seyfarth Shaw ADA Title III Lawsuit Tracker
State-by-State Filing Data
The geographic distribution of ADA lawsuits is heavily concentrated in three states, which account for nearly 75% of all federal filings:
California
Led by serial litigants in LA and SF. No cure period. Plaintiff-friendly courts.
Florida
Concentrated in Miami-Dade. Aggressive law firms like Bursor & Fisher. No mandatory mediation.
New York
DOWN from 2,500+ in 2023. Stricter standing requirements after Laufer v. Acheson Hotels ruling by the Supreme Court.
Texas
Growing rapidly. Houston and Dallas courts. No state ADA equivalent provides leverage.
Pennsylvania
Philadelphia courts. Targeting retail and hospitality.
All Other States
Only Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota had ZERO federal ADA Title III lawsuits in 2025.
For detailed state-by-state filing data, see our complete 2026 lawsuit statistics report and state-specific accessibility guides.
The Backlash: Two State Bills That Could Change Everything
The sheer volume of lawsuits — many filed by a small number of serial litigants against small businesses — has sparked a legislative backlash. Two states are now proposing laws to curb what they call "abusive" ADA litigation, while maintaining protections for people with disabilities.
Missouri HB 1694
"Accessible Business Protection Act"
Key Provision: 90-Day Cure Period
Before filing a lawsuit, plaintiffs must provide written notice of the specific accessibility barrier and give the business 90 days to cure the violation. If the business makes a "good faith effort" to remediate within that window, no lawsuit can proceed.
Sponsor & Backers
Backed by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). Introduced after 100+ small businesses in Missouri received ADA demand letters from a single law firm in a 90-day period. Many businesses settled for $5,000-$15,000 rather than fight.
Impact on Businesses
- • Businesses get a genuine opportunity to fix issues before facing litigation costs
- • "Good faith" standard means you need to show real remediation effort, not just intent
- • Does NOT eliminate the obligation to be accessible — only changes the enforcement pathway
- • Serial litigants can still file, but must wait through the cure period each time
Status: Introduced February 2026. Committee hearing scheduled. Expected floor vote Q2 2026.
Utah SB 68
"ADA Accountability & Fairness Act"
Key Provision: Counter-Sue Right
If an ADA claim is found to be "abusive" or filed in "bad faith," the defendant can counter-sue for attorney's fees and damages. This is unprecedented — currently, ADA defendants who win can rarely recover their legal costs.
30-Day Remediation Presumption
Creates a legal presumption that if a business fixes the accessibility barrier within 30 days of notification, the claim should be dismissed. Courts retain discretion for repeat offenders or egregious cases.
"Abusive Litigation" Definition
- • Filing 10+ substantially similar ADA claims in a 12-month period
- • Claims where the plaintiff never visited or intended to use the business's services
- • Demand letters that seek monetary settlement without providing specific violation details
- • Claims filed against businesses that can demonstrate ongoing remediation efforts
Status: Introduced January 2026. Passed committee. Expected Senate floor vote March 2026.
What These Bills Mean for Your Business
Let's be clear about something: reduced fear of lawsuits does not mean reduced obligation to be accessible. The ADA is still the law. WCAG compliance is still the standard. People with disabilities still deserve equal access to digital services.
That said, these bills — if passed — would change the game in meaningful ways:
For Small Businesses
A 90-day cure period means a demand letter doesn't automatically mean a $75K settlement. You get time to fix the issue, which costs far less than litigation.
For Serial Litigants
Counter-sue provisions and the 'abusive litigation' definition make drive-by lawsuits riskier. Filing 10+ cookie-cutter complaints could trigger consequences.
For Accessibility Industry
Demand for proactive compliance tools and audits will increase. Businesses will want to fix issues during the cure period, not wait for lawsuits.
For People with Disabilities
Advocates worry cure periods delay access. But the current system — where most settlements result in zero actual remediation — isn't working either.
The Overlay Problem: Why 30% of Lawsuits Involve "Accessible" Sites
Perhaps the most damning statistic in the 2025 lawsuit data: 30% of ADA web accessibility lawsuits were filed against websites that use accessibility overlay widgets — the very products marketed as lawsuit prevention tools.
This isn't surprising to accessibility professionals. Overlay widgets add a JavaScript toolbar to websites that promises WCAG compliance through automated "fixes." In reality:
If your business uses an overlay widget thinking it provides lawsuit protection, you may actually be increasing your legal risk. The data shows that overlays draw plaintiff attention rather than deflecting it — they signal to ADA law firms that a site has known accessibility issues and chose a shortcut instead of real remediation.
Proactive Compliance vs. Reactive Litigation: The Cost Comparison
Whether or not these reform bills pass, the math is clear: fixing accessibility proactively costs a fraction of fighting a lawsuit.
The tax credit angle: Small businesses can claim the Disabled Access Credit (IRS Form 8826) — up to $5,000/year for accessibility improvements. At $29/month, a tool like RatedWithAI costs $348/year — well within the credit threshold and effectively free after the tax benefit.
What Businesses Should Do NOW: 5-Step Action Plan
Regardless of whether these reform bills pass, here's the smartest path forward:
Scan Your Website Today
Run a free automated accessibility scan to understand your current compliance level. This takes 60 seconds and gives you a baseline score plus a prioritized list of violations.
Fix Critical Violations First
Focus on the issues most likely to trigger lawsuits: missing alt text, color contrast failures, keyboard traps, and missing form labels. These four categories account for 80%+ of ADA web lawsuits.
Remove Overlay Widgets
If you're using an accessibility overlay, remove it. Replace it with real WCAG fixes. The overlay may be increasing your legal risk while providing a false sense of security.
Document Your Compliance Efforts
Keep records of scans, fixes, and remediation plans. If a cure period law passes, 'good faith effort' documentation is your defense. Even without these laws, courts look favorably on businesses that demonstrate genuine accessibility efforts.
Set Up Ongoing Monitoring
Accessibility isn't a one-time project. Content updates, CMS changes, and third-party integrations can introduce new violations at any time. Monthly or weekly automated scans catch regressions before they become lawsuit triggers.
Don't Wait for Reform — Be Proactive
Whether or not cure period laws pass in your state, proactive compliance is always cheaper than reactive litigation. Start with a free scan to see where you stand.