RatedWithAI

RatedWithAI

Accessibility scanner

Free Scan
← Back to Blog••15 min read

Online-Only Stores Must Comply with ADA: 2026 Court Rulings Confirm

Two Wisconsin federal court decisions eliminate any doubt: businesses that sell exclusively online — with no physical store — must make their websites accessible under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Here's what every ecommerce owner needs to know.

The Wisconsin Rulings That Changed Everything

In January 2026, two federal court decisions in Wisconsin's Eastern District put an end to a question that ecommerce businesses had been hiding behind for years: "If I don't have a physical store, the ADA doesn't apply to me, right?"

Wrong.

In Cazares v. Acro International Inc. and Hippe v. Me Too LLC, blind plaintiffs sued online-only retailers — businesses with no brick-and-mortar locations whatsoever — for operating inaccessible websites. Both cases resulted in default judgments ordering the businesses to bring their websites into full ADA compliance within 180 days.

The court cited well-established Seventh Circuit precedent: "A place of public accommodation includes websites offering goods or services for sale."

These weren't novel interpretations of law. They were confirmations of a trend that's been building for over a decade. But for the thousands of ecommerce businesses that assumed they were safe without a physical presence, the message is now unmistakable: your website IS your store, and it must be accessible.

⚠️ Key Takeaway from Both Rulings

The courts ordered full website accessibility compliance within 180 days, awarded damages to the plaintiffs, and established that no physical storefront is required for ADA Title III to apply. Both defendants failed to respond to the lawsuits — a costly mistake that resulted in default judgments.

The Legal Debate: Does ADA Cover Online-Only Businesses?

For years, the accessibility of websites under ADA Title III has been one of the most contested areas in disability rights law. The ADA, signed in 1990, never mentions websites. Its list of "places of public accommodation" includes hotels, restaurants, theaters, and retail stores — physical places that existed before the internet was mainstream.

The question that divided federal courts for decades was whether those categories extend to online businesses. Three legal theories emerged:

Theory 1: The "Physical Place" Requirement

Some courts held that ADA Title III only covers physical locations. Under this reading, a website could only be covered if it had a "nexus" to a physical store — essentially serving as a digital extension of a brick-and-mortar business. This was the dominant view in certain circuits through the 2010s.

Theory 2: The "Nexus" Test

A middle-ground approach required some connection between the website and a physical location. A hotel's booking website, for example, would be covered because it's connected to a physical hotel. But a purely online retailer with no physical presence might not qualify.

Theory 3: Websites as Independent Places of Public Accommodation

The broadest interpretation — and the one gaining dominance — holds that websites themselves can be places of public accommodation, regardless of any connection to a physical location. When a business offers goods or services to the public through a website, that website is the store.

The Wisconsin rulings firmly adopt Theory 3. And they're far from alone.

Circuit-by-Circuit: Where Your Business Stands

The legal landscape for online-only business ADA compliance varies by federal circuit, but the trend is overwhelmingly toward broader coverage. Here's where each circuit stands as of early 2026:

✅ Circuits Where Online-Only Businesses Are Covered

  • First Circuit (ME, MA, NH, PR, RI) — Websites are independently covered. Carparts Distribution Center v. Automotive Wholesaler's Association (1994) was the landmark case.
  • Second Circuit (CT, NY, VT) — Broad interpretation. New York is the #3 state for ADA digital lawsuits with 1,471 federal filings in 2025.
  • Seventh Circuit (IL, IN, WI) — The circuit covering the Wisconsin rulings. Explicitly holds websites are places of public accommodation. Illinois filings surged 65% in 2025.
  • Ninth Circuit (AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, WA) — Applied nexus test historically but trending toward broader coverage. California leads the nation with 3,252 ADA filings in 2025.
  • Eleventh Circuit (AL, FL, GA) — Covers websites connected to physical locations; recent cases expanding reach. Florida is #2 for ADA lawsuits with 1,823 filings.

⚠️ Circuits With Mixed or Evolving Positions

  • Third Circuit (DE, NJ, PA) — Generally covers websites but case law still developing for purely online businesses.
  • Sixth Circuit (KY, MI, OH, TN) — Nexus test still applied in some cases, but the trend is toward broader coverage.
  • Eighth Circuit (AR, IA, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) — Most restrictive. Missouri recently dismissed two ADA web cases for lack of standing, but this was based on specific facts rather than a blanket rule against online coverage.

The bottom line: in the majority of the country, online-only businesses are covered by ADA Title III. Even in circuits with more restrictive interpretations, the direction of travel is clear. It's not a question of whether your ecommerce store will need to comply — it's when.

Why Ecommerce Stores Are Prime Lawsuit Targets

Ecommerce businesses aren't just covered by the ADA — they're disproportionately targeted. According to UsableNet's annual tracking, approximately 70% of ADA website lawsuits target ecommerce sites. There are several reasons why:

1. Transactional Nature Creates Clear Harm

When a blind person can't complete a purchase on your website, the harm is concrete and demonstrable. Courts find it straightforward: the plaintiff wanted to buy something, couldn't because of accessibility barriers, and was effectively excluded from a place of public accommodation. This clear cause-and-effect makes ecommerce cases stronger than claims about informational websites.

2. High Volume of Detectable Barriers

Ecommerce sites are complex. Product pages, search filters, shopping carts, checkout flows, account creation forms, address autocomplete, payment processing — each feature is a potential point of failure. Automated scanning tools can quickly identify dozens of WCAG violations across thousands of product pages, giving plaintiff attorneys a detailed list of specific barriers to cite in complaints.

3. Third-Party Integrations Multiply Risk

Payment processors, chatbots, review widgets, recommendation engines, social media feeds, analytics popups, cookie consent banners — most ecommerce stores rely on dozens of third-party integrations. Each one can introduce accessibility barriers that the store owner may not even know about. And courts have held that store owners are responsible for the accessibility of their entire customer experience, including third-party components.

4. Rapid Content Changes Create Regressions

Online stores constantly add new products, run promotions, update banners, and modify layouts. Each change can introduce new accessibility barriers. A store that was compliant last month may not be compliant today because someone uploaded product images without alt text or added a promotional popup without keyboard navigation. This is why nearly half of ADA lawsuit defendants face repeat litigation.

5. Scale Makes Serial Filing Efficient

Serial plaintiffs and their attorneys can use automated tools to scan thousands of ecommerce sites in hours, identifying potential targets and generating nearly identical complaints. In 2025, one plaintiff filed 57 separate ADA lawsuits against online retailers. When filing is this efficient, every non-compliant online store is a potential target.

📊 The Numbers

  • 8,667 ADA Title III lawsuits filed in federal courts in 2025 (Seyfarth Shaw)
  • ~70% target ecommerce websites (UsableNet)
  • ~46% of defendants are sued more than once
  • $5,000–$75,000 typical first-time settlement range
  • Top 4 states (CA, FL, NY, IL) account for 83.1% of all federal ADA filings

Most Common Accessibility Barriers in Online Stores

Understanding which barriers trigger lawsuits helps you prioritize remediation. Based on accessibility testing data and lawsuit complaints, these are the most frequently cited issues in ecommerce ADA cases:

Product Images Without Alt Text

This is the single most common violation. When product images lack descriptive alternative text, screen reader users can't identify what's being sold. Imagine trying to shop when every product is described as "image" or "IMG_4532.jpg." For stores with hundreds or thousands of products, this can mean thousands of individual WCAG violations — and each one is citable in a lawsuit.

Inaccessible Checkout Flows

The checkout process is where most ecommerce accessibility lawsuits focus. Common issues include: form fields without labels (screen readers can't tell users what information to enter), custom dropdown selectors that don't work with keyboards, address autocomplete widgets that trap keyboard focus, error messages that aren't announced to assistive technology, and CAPTCHA challenges without accessible alternatives.

Product Filters and Search

Many online stores use JavaScript-heavy product filtering systems — sliders for price ranges, expandable category trees, color swatches, size selectors — that are completely inaccessible to keyboard and screen reader users. When a customer with a disability can't filter products by size, color, or price, they effectively can't shop.

Missing or Inadequate Color Contrast

Sale prices in light red text, "Add to Cart" buttons with insufficient contrast, gray text on slightly-less-gray backgrounds — low contrast is endemic in ecommerce design. WCAG 2.1 AA requires a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text. Many fashion and luxury ecommerce sites fail this basic requirement.

Popup Overlays and Modal Dialogs

"Sign up for 10% off!" — these popups are ubiquitous in ecommerce. But most are accessibility nightmares: they don't trap focus properly (keyboard users can't close them), they're not announced to screen readers, the close button is tiny or invisible to assistive technology, and they block access to the main content underneath.

Dynamic Content Without ARIA Announcements

"3 items added to cart" — sighted users see the cart count update. Screen reader users hear nothing. When product quantities change, cart totals update, or "out of stock" warnings appear dynamically, this information must be programmatically communicated to assistive technologies using ARIA live regions. Most ecommerce sites skip this entirely.

Platform-Specific Risks: Shopify, WooCommerce, and Beyond

Your ecommerce platform choice affects your baseline accessibility risk, but no platform makes you automatically compliant. Here's what store owners on each major platform should know:

Shopify

Shopify's core platform and default themes (Dawn, Refresh) are generally well-structured for accessibility. Shopify has invested significantly in accessible checkout and core commerce functionality. However, the risk comes from:

Read our complete Shopify ADA Compliance Guide for platform-specific remediation steps.

WooCommerce (WordPress)

WooCommerce's accessibility depends heavily on the WordPress theme used. The WooCommerce plugin itself provides reasonable baseline accessibility for cart and checkout, but:

Squarespace

Squarespace provides generally accessible templates and has improved its platform accessibility significantly. The main risks are:

See our Squarespace ADA Compliance Guide for specific recommendations.

Custom-Built Stores

Stores built on custom frameworks (React, Next.js, headless commerce) carry the highest accessibility risk. Without a platform providing accessible baseline components, every interaction — cart functionality, checkout flow, product galleries, filtering — must be built with accessibility in mind from scratch. The upside is complete control; the downside is complete responsibility.

Anatomy of an Ecommerce ADA Lawsuit

Understanding how these lawsuits unfold helps you assess your risk and prepare a response strategy. Here's the typical timeline:

Day 0
Plaintiff discovers inaccessible website

A person with a disability (typically blind or low-vision) attempts to use your website and encounters barriers. In serial filing cases, plaintiff attorneys use automated scanning tools to identify target websites. They may test dozens of sites per day.

Day 1–30
Demand letter or lawsuit filed

Some attorneys send a demand letter first, requesting $3,000–$25,000 to settle without litigation. Others proceed directly to filing a federal complaint. In the Wisconsin cases, the businesses received formal complaints but never responded.

Day 30–90
Response deadline and discovery

You have 21 days to respond to a federal complaint (30 days if served by mail). Failure to respond — as happened in both Wisconsin cases — results in a default judgment. If you respond, discovery begins: documenting your accessibility efforts, website audits, and remediation history.

Day 90–180
Settlement negotiations or trial preparation

Most cases (90%+) settle. Typical settlement includes monetary payment ($5,000–$75,000 for first-time defendants), agreement to remediate the website (usually within 90–180 days), and often a requirement for ongoing monitoring and periodic accessibility audits for 2–3 years.

Ongoing
Post-settlement compliance

The settlement typically requires ongoing accessibility monitoring, regular audits, and documentation. Businesses that fail to maintain compliance face repeat lawsuits from different plaintiffs.

The critical lesson from the Wisconsin cases: ignoring a lawsuit doesn't make it go away. Both Acro International and Me Too LLC apparently chose not to respond, resulting in default judgments that included mandatory compliance orders and damages — with no opportunity to negotiate.

Your Compliance Roadmap: From Vulnerable to Protected

Whether you're a solo Etsy alternative running on Shopify or a mid-market ecommerce operation with thousands of SKUs, here's a practical roadmap to get compliant and stay compliant:

Phase 1: Assessment (Week 1–2)

Phase 2: Critical Remediation (Week 2–4)

Phase 3: Comprehensive Compliance (Week 4–8)

Phase 4: Ongoing Maintenance (Continuous)

The Real Cost: Compliance vs. Litigation

Business owners often assume accessibility compliance is prohibitively expensive. In reality, the cost of not being compliant far exceeds the cost of proactive compliance.

3-Year Cost Comparison: Proactive Compliance vs. Lawsuit Response

✅ Proactive Compliance

  • Initial audit & remediation: $3,000–$15,000
  • Monthly monitoring: $100–$500/mo ($3,600–$18,000 over 3yr)
  • Annual manual audit: $1,000–$3,000/yr ($3,000–$9,000 over 3yr)
  • Staff training: $500–$2,000/yr ($1,500–$6,000 over 3yr)
  • 3-Year Total: $11,100–$48,000

❌ Lawsuit Response (Single Incident)

  • Legal defense: $15,000–$75,000
  • Settlement payment: $5,000–$75,000
  • Emergency remediation: $10,000–$50,000
  • Court-ordered monitoring: $5,000–$25,000/yr ($10,000–$50,000 over 2yr)
  • Business disruption & reputation: $5,000–$25,000
  • Single Lawsuit Total: $45,000–$275,000

With ~46% of defendants facing repeat lawsuits, the actual litigation cost for many businesses is 2–3x the figures above.

The IRS Disabled Access Credit (Form 8826) allows small businesses to claim up to $5,000 annually for accessibility expenses, further reducing the effective cost of proactive compliance.

Why One-Time Fixes Aren't Enough for Online Stores

The Wisconsin rulings ordered compliance within 180 days. But for ecommerce stores, compliance isn't a destination — it's a continuous process. Here's why:

Product Catalog Changes

Every new product listing needs descriptive alt text, properly structured content, and accessible interactive elements. A store that adds 50 new products per week creates 50 new potential accessibility violations per week — unless there's a systematic process for accessible content creation.

Seasonal Promotions and Sales Events

Black Friday banners, holiday gift guides, flash sale popups, countdown timers — promotional content is often created under time pressure by marketing teams focused on conversion, not accessibility. These temporary additions frequently introduce barriers that persist long after the promotion ends.

Platform and Plugin Updates

Shopify theme updates, WooCommerce plugin updates, and platform feature changes can all alter accessibility behavior. An update that changes how checkout handles form validation, for example, could break screen reader compatibility overnight.

Third-Party Widget Updates

Review platforms, live chat providers, email signup forms, and other third-party services update their widgets independently. Your site's accessibility can change without you making any changes at all — because a third-party provider updated their JavaScript.

This is precisely why courts increasingly include ongoing monitoring requirements in ADA settlement agreements. The DOJ's rejection of the Fashion Nova settlement specifically criticized the lack of a mandatory ongoing monitoring mechanism. The message is clear: fix it once, and you'll likely be back in court.

🔄 The Case for Continuous Monitoring

Automated accessibility monitoring catches regressions before plaintiffs do. When your monitoring tool flags that a new product page is missing alt text or a checkout update broke keyboard navigation, you can fix it in hours — not months after a lawsuit is filed.

Try RatedWithAI's free accessibility checker →

Frequently Asked Questions

Do online-only stores need to comply with the ADA?

Yes. Multiple federal courts have ruled that websites operated by online-only businesses qualify as places of public accommodation under ADA Title III. In 2026, two Wisconsin federal court decisions confirmed that online retailers with no physical storefronts must make their websites accessible. The Seventh Circuit has held that "a place of public accommodation includes websites offering goods or services for sale."

Can I get sued under the ADA if my business is entirely online?

Yes. Being an online-only business does not shield you from ADA litigation. Courts in multiple federal circuits have held that websites selling goods or services qualify as places of public accommodation, regardless of whether the business has a physical location. In 2025, 8,667 ADA Title III lawsuits were filed in federal courts alone, and a growing number target ecommerce-only businesses.

What accessibility standard must online stores follow?

While the ADA does not specify a technical standard for websites, courts overwhelmingly point to WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the benchmark. The DOJ's 2024 Title II rule codifies WCAG 2.1 AA for government websites, and most settlement agreements require this standard. Following WCAG 2.1 AA is the safest path to compliance.

What happens if my online store is not ADA compliant?

Non-compliant stores risk demand letters ($3,000–$25,000), federal lawsuits ($10,000–$100,000+ to defend), injunctive relief requiring remediation within 90–180 days, ongoing monitoring requirements, and reputational damage. In the Wisconsin cases, courts ordered full WCAG compliance within 180 days and awarded damages.

Which ecommerce platforms are most vulnerable to ADA lawsuits?

Custom-built websites and heavily customized themes are most vulnerable. While major platforms like Shopify provide reasonably accessible base themes, merchants who add third-party apps, custom checkout flows, or interactive elements often introduce barriers. Stores with JavaScript-heavy galleries, inaccessible filters, or missing form labels are common targets.

Does the "nexus" requirement protect online-only businesses?

Not in most circuits. The nexus test — requiring a connection between a website and physical location — has been largely abandoned. The First, Second, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits have all recognized websites as independent places of public accommodation. The trend nationwide is toward broader coverage.

How much does it cost to make an online store ADA compliant?

Costs depend on store complexity. Small stores (under 50 products): $2,000–$8,000 initial + $100–$300/month monitoring. Medium stores (50–500 products): $5,000–$20,000 + $200–$500/month. Large stores (500+ products): $15,000–$75,000+ + $500–$2,000/month. These costs are far lower than defending a single lawsuit, and the IRS Disabled Access Credit can offset up to $5,000 per year.

How can online stores protect themselves from ADA lawsuits?

The most effective strategy: (1) conduct a WCAG 2.1 AA audit of your entire site including checkout, (2) remediate critical issues, (3) implement ongoing automated monitoring, (4) test with assistive technologies, (5) publish an accessibility statement, (6) train your team, and (7) document everything. Continuous monitoring is essential because product updates, promotions, and third-party integrations constantly introduce new barriers.

Is Your Online Store Accessible?

Don't wait for a lawsuit to find out. Scan your ecommerce site for WCAG 2.1 AA violations in seconds — free.

Free Accessibility Scan →Full Ecommerce Guide

Related Articles

Ecommerce Accessibility: Complete ADA Compliance Guide

70% of ADA lawsuits target ecommerce. Full guide for online retailers.

Shopify ADA Compliance Guide 2026

Platform-specific accessibility guide for Shopify store owners.

Repeat ADA Lawsuits: Why One Settlement Isn't Enough

~46% of defendants get sued again. How to break the cycle.

ADA Lawsuit State Migration 2026

Why Illinois filings surged 65% and what it means by state.