Document Type
Student Note
Abstract
When the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) was enacted in 1990, no one could have envisioned the way technology would dominate society as it does today. Title III, Public Accommodations, of the ADA was enacted to allow disabled individuals the opportunity to fully enjoy equal access to goods and services offered to the public. Title III has traditionally been applied to physical, stand-alone locations such as hotels, shopping centers, and restaurants. However, almost every facet of an American’s life today involves a screen emitting a bright light. Additionally, businesses of all sizes are facing mountains of web accessibility litigation due to the absence of strict accessibility compliance standards. Thus, a question of utmost importance emerges: Does Title III of the ADA extend to websites and mobile applications as places of “public accommodation?”
The circuits are currently split over this question, with each answering it using one of three approaches: (1) A website/mobile application is a place of public accommodation regardless of a physical location; (2) A website/mobile application is not a place of public accommodation with or without a physical location; or (3) A website/mobile application is a place of public accommodation if the plaintiff alleges a sufficient “nexus” from the website to some physical location. This Note will discuss the history of Title III of the ADA and analyze the circuit split surrounding places of public accommodations as it pertains to websites and mobile applications. In doing so, this Note will discuss how each branch of Government has a role to play in solving this issue, and how, ultimately, Congress is in the best position to solve this issue by adding a Sixth Title to the ADA. Lastly, this Note will discuss steps businesses of all sizes can take to avoid costly web accessibility litigation.
Recommended Citation
James Mazzone, Someone Please Do Something: The Fight for Web Accessibility Rages On, 126 W. Va. L. Rev. 299 (2023).