ADA Title III (42 U.S.C. §§ 12181–12189) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in “places of public accommodation” — including many private businesses. Federal courts apply Title III to websites and mobile apps of public accommodations, with the operative technical benchmark being WCAG 2.1 Level AA. The leading case is Robles v. Domino's Pizza, 913 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2019).
Who is a “place of public accommodation”?
42 U.S.C. § 12181(7) enumerates 12 categories: lodging, restaurants, theaters, auditoriums, sales/rental establishments, service establishments (banks, salons, gas stations, professional services), public transit terminals, museums, parks, educational facilities, gyms, and social service centers. Courts have construed this broadly enough to capture most online B2C businesses.
Held ADA Title III applies to websites and mobile apps of public accommodations. Supreme Court denied certiorari in October 2019. Domino's settled in June 2022 after a six-year fight.
Why it matters: The single most important precedent on website accessibility under ADA Title III.
Gil v. Winn-Dixie (2021)
11th Circuit — different reading
Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 11th Cir. 2021
Reversed lower court; held Winn-Dixie's website was NOT a 'place of public accommodation' under Title III.
Why it matters: Created a circuit split with Robles. Why jurisdiction matters for website ADA exposure.
Landmark Title III website settlements
NFB v. Target (2008)
Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind v. Target Corp., N.D. Cal. (settled 2008)
$6 million class-action settlement. Established that a website tied to physical stores must be accessible under Title III.
Fashion Nova class settlement (2025)
Fashion Nova class-action settlement, California (2025)
$5.15 million settlement; website + app accessibility commitment.
What technical standard does Title III actually require?
There is no formal DOJ Title III technical standard for websites. In practice, courts, the DOJ in its 2022 web accessibility guidance, and plaintiffs all apply WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the benchmark. That standard is 50 success criteria across the POUR principles.
2025 Title III enforcement landscape
8,667 total Title III federal lawsuits in 2025 (Seyfarth Shaw, March 2026).
3,117 website accessibility lawsuits — 36% of all Title III filings — a 27% YoY increase.
~95% of sued companies settle rather than litigate (UsableNet).
22.64% of sued sites had an overlay widget at time of suit (EcomBack H1 2025).
Yes in most U.S. circuits. The Ninth Circuit's 2019 ruling in Robles v. Domino's Pizza established that Title III's public accommodation provisions cover websites and mobile apps tied to a physical business. The Supreme Court declined to review the case in October 2019, leaving Robles as binding precedent in the 9th Circuit and persuasive elsewhere. The Eleventh Circuit's Gil v. Winn-Dixie ruling (2021) reached the opposite conclusion, creating a circuit split.
What technical standard does Title III require?
There is no formal DOJ technical standard for Title III websites. Courts and the DOJ consistently apply WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the operative benchmark. The DOJ's 2022 web accessibility guidance reinforced that WCAG 2.1 AA is the standard the agency uses to evaluate Title III website complaints.
How many ADA Title III website lawsuits were filed in 2025?
Seyfarth Shaw's 2025 ADA Title III Lawsuit Tracker reports 8,667 total Title III federal lawsuits — and 3,117 of those (36%) were website accessibility cases. That is a 27% increase over 2024's 2,452 website cases. EcomBack reported H1 2025 digital filings up 37% YoY.
What states see the most ADA website lawsuits?
In 2025 federal data: New York (1,021), Florida (961), Illinois (585), Minnesota (162), Pennsylvania (137). California's federal website-only number (4) dramatically understates exposure — plaintiffs have shifted to state court under the Unruh Civil Rights Act ($4,000 per violation, no actual damages required).