This is a super-short post. Yesterday, the Department of Justice issued its "spring 2025" (I think they meant 2026) regulatory agenda to give the American public a heads up on the changes in regulations that it foresees for the next six months-- and disability rights regulations were the only existing regulations on the administration's list.
DOJ is Considering Softening the Web Accessibility Rule.
Here is the full explanation in the Federal Register,
Abstract: The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) states that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. 12132. However, many public entities' ( i.e.,State and local governments') websites and mobile apps fail to incorporate or activate features that enable users with disabilities to access the public entity's services, programs, and activities. Accordingly, on April 24, 2024, the Department published a final rule revising its regulations implementing title II of the (ADA) to provide technical standards to assist public entities in complying with their existing obligations to make their websites and mobile apps accessible to individuals with disabilities. (89 FR 31320)
The Department now plans to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to reconsider whether some of the regulatory provisions imposed by the April 24, 2024 rule could be made less costly.
Don't get me wrong-- I think that there were a number of issues with the current regulation. When DOJ says, however, that they want to "reconsider whether some of the regulatory provisions... could be made less costly," that's a pretty direct indication that they want to water down the requirements.
Something Uncomfortable Can Become Comfortable
Over the last eighteen months, disability rights attorneys like me have been wrestling with the ADA Title II web regulation. I believe we’ve finally reached a common understanding of how to make it work in practice. That clarity only came through the hard lessons we’ve learned working with state and local governments in Colorado.
Why Colorado? Because their state law HB 21-1110 is essentially the DOJ web regulation, except on steroids. Here’s how HB 21-1110 goes further:
- Broader scope: It requires WCAG 2.1 compliance not just for websites and mobile apps, but for all IT systems, including kiosks, desktop software, and all information and communication technology (ICT).
- Internal coverage: Unlike the ADA, it applies to both public-facing and internal applications.
- Monetary Damages: It authorizes statutory damages of $3,500 per violation.
- Tougher deadlines: Compliance was required by July 2024, with only a one-year extension available.
In Colorado, we’ve lived through these requirements. The result? No catastrophe. Governments adapted, deadlines came and went, and the work got done. If Colorado is the canary in the coal mine, the canary is alive and well.
And here’s the bonus: Colorado is saving the rest of the country a lot of money. For our clients there, we recommended targeted audits of the dozens—sometimes hundreds—of third-party applications they depend on. Replacing all of them would bankrupt most jurisdictions and make PDF remediation look cheap by comparison. Instead, Colorado governments pushed their vendors to improve accessibility, and the vendors responded. The takeaway? It makes little sense for other states and local governments to spend heavily on testing web applications until vendors deliver those more accessible updates. That shift alone represents potential savings in the tens—or even hundreds—of thousands of dollars.
Why We Should Support the Current DOJ Web Regulation
Say what you will about the current administration. I think we can all agree, however, that positive change in the disability rights area are hard-fought and well-earned. I also can't predict what the upcoming NPRM will say, but, when any administration says that it is trying to make a regulation "less costly," that ultimately means weakening the regulation.
What Can We Do in the Meantime?
I’m not an advocate and I know others in this space will be championing the cause. But if you’re concerned, one practical step is to write to your U.S. senator or representative. When members of Congress hear from constituents, they raise those concerns with the Justice Department—and DOJ has to respond. If enough voices are raised, DOJ may take the backlash seriously.
I've blogged before about how some organizations are already undermining the ADA Title II web accessibility rule. Now may be the time for them to hear the other side: why accessibility matters, why websites must be inclusive, and why this regulation isn’t nearly as burdensome as some suggest.
For a plain-language overview of the ADA Title II web accessibility rule, deadlines, and a practical compliance roadmap, see our companion resource site at adatitleii.us.
Disclaimer
Nothing in this post should be interpreted as legal advice or as forming an attorney-client relationship. It is offered for educational purposes only. You should always contact a qualified attorney in your area to discuss your legal rights and responsibilities.
Want to See More Content Like This?
Want the latest blog posts, videos, white papers, and announcements? Sign up for our mailing list and stay in the loop!
We're Here to Help When You're Ready
Take a deep breath. Then feel free to reach out to our team when you're ready to discuss your accessibility needs.
0 comments on “DOJ Questioning the New Title II Web Regulation”