Shopify Addresses Accessibility Lawsuits

“Everything was going great, and we were having our best year ever. Then I woke up to an email from an attorney that made my heart sink.”

Like thousands of small business owners across the United States, Clay*, an online store owner, was sued without warning for his website allegedly not complying with an accessibility law. 

“After we started digging into it, there was no definitive standard for accessibility. Business owners want to make improvements to improve access, we want everyone to be able to buy our products. But there’s no clear standard to achieve.”

When the Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law in 1990, it was a watershed moment. Its purpose was to ensure that people with disabilities could fully participate in society. And to this day, the ADA still protects the most vulnerable from discrimination and exclusion. 

However, in recent years, predatory lawyers have weaponized the law and are using it to harvest settlements at the expense of American small businesses. 

Accessibility is essential for commerce, and business owners like Clay want their stores to be accessible to every customer. But vague accessibility compliance standards have left businesses guessing, making them sitting ducks for lawsuits. Meanwhile, the interests of consumers with disabilities are rarely served by profit-motivated litigation. In the end, there are no real winners—except for the lawyers.

In a damning 2023 report from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, the organization stated: “Three decades after its enactment, much ADA litigation has nothing to do with accessibility, but rather has become characterized by abusive lawsuits run by a small group of lawyers and law firms.”

Since 2013, the number of ADA lawsuits has exploded. Cases peaked in 2021, with more than 12,000 filings, a nearly 400% increase from less than a decade prior. In case after case after case, law firms are exploiting the ambiguity of accessibility laws with aggressive ADA lawsuits that jeopardize the livelihoods of small business owners while doing little to promote genuine accessibility. 

A quick, easy payout 

When he found out he was being sued, Clay weighed the risks of a protracted legal battle and decided—like many business owners—to settle his case out of court. The resulting financial drain had serious consequences for his company. 

“So instead of investing back into the company and investing in the employees, which could have made a better economic impact on their families, it went into some attorney's pocket,” says Clay. 

The money lost in these cases doesn’t go toward improving access or benefiting the disability community. The settlement only serves to personally enrich a single plaintiff and their lawyer—not create meaningful change.

A settlement is the outcome these law firms hope for and what they usually get, with some of them making these lawsuits their entire business model. More than 80% of ADA cases come from “high-volume plaintiffs”—those who file at least eight cases a year. Infamously, one New York firm is reportedly responsible for a quarter of digital ADA lawsuits nationally. The vast majority of cases are filed in New York, California, and Florida, the states where ADA laws can allow plaintiffs to be awarded significant damages. 

“We want fair access. But the integrity of ADA is being compromised with these suits,” says Sean*, the founder of a watch and accessories brand who’s been sued not once, but twice for alleged non-compliance. “I had to pay $10,000 to this guy because he exploited a change in a rule I didn’t know about.” 

Unclear, unfair playbooks

When it comes to websites, the uncertainty surrounding what constitutes “reasonable accessibility” can be overwhelming. When small business owners attempt to comply they quickly realize there are no clear guidelines or specific steps, and compliance can be subjective. 

There's also the larger question of whether the ADA even applies to websites that have no “nexus” to a physical brick-and-mortar store. And that's a question that's being battled in U.S. courts today, with the Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits in a split over the issue.

At Shopify, we actively collaborate with persons with disabilities to identify and address accessibility issues. We provide merchants with accessibility-optimized components, tools like Sidekick for automated alt text generation, and themes built with accessibility standards from the ground up.

However, creating an accessible website is not a one-time task. It requires ongoing maintenance. Small online businesses operate on tight budgets and with limited staff. They lack the financial resources to hire specialized web developers or dedicated accessibility teams. This is a weakness that litigators exploit.

Grace*, the founder of a food and beverage company, experienced this helplessness firsthand. She recalls that it felt like a shakedown.

“I got served the papers on my birthday, so I remember it very clearly,” says Grace. “Ultimately, they wanted $30,000, and we couldn’t afford it. We’re a small company with only three employees, and the brand wasn’t even yet profitable.”

She spent almost a year battling the lawsuit before settling for an undisclosed sum out of court.

“It would be the first thing I thought about when I woke up every morning. It was mentally taxing and scary. Entrepreneurs don’t go into business thinking about these things.”

In Grace, Sean, and Clay’s cases, they made the requested updates to their websites. With Clay, he improved his site’s alt text, the metadata, and the contrast ratio to aid the visually impaired. But they discovered the lawyers didn’t seem too concerned with whether they made the ADA updates or not, they just wanted a speedy settlement.

“I told them my site would be ADA compliant by a certain date. But I never heard from them once they got their check,” says Grace.

Adds Clay, “There was no follow up. They didn’t care if my site was accessible. They just cared about how fast they could get the money and move on to the next business.”

Reform on the horizon 

The fact that law firms go after small businesses as a strategy is especially heinous to Clay. He believes it has a chilling effect on entrepreneurship.

“They're not taking on the big online retailers of the world. They look for small businesses. And it’s crushing the American dream.”

Faced with the prospect of costly lawsuits, small business owners may become hesitant to invest in new ideas. Instead of channeling energy into growth, they’re preoccupied with risk management. Grace is afraid to even touch her site anymore out of fear that any changes will make it non-compliant. 

“We used to have all these cool, interactive elements on our site. But now I don’t want to try anything creative because I don’t want to get sued again.”

What is most unfair about these lawsuits is that businesses have no opportunity for remediation. These are issues that business owners are often completely unaware of until they’re sued. Grace, Clay, and Sean all agreed that a better scenario would have steps between the identification of the problem and the ensuing legal action. 

Even some disability advocates from organizations like the National Federation of the Blind have expressed concern that this “firehose of litigation” is not the answer and can create more problems than it solves. They believe our legal system should be used as a last resort and that "partnership and collaboration” is a better approach.

That’s where “notice and cure” legislation comes in. This type of reform is gaining traction in both Congress and certain states and would change the way ADA lawsuits are handled. Instead of being immediately sued, business owners would have a period of time to address alleged violations before legal escalation. By providing a grace period, “notice and cure” allows entrepreneurs to invest in accessibility upgrades that benefit all customers. Instead of losing thousands of dollars in settlements and facing bankruptcy, they can put money toward actually fixing the issue. This can significantly reduce the number of lawsuits while fostering an environment of cooperation and communication between business owners and accessibility advocates. If successful, “notice and cure” could make a difference for store owners and shoppers. 

Justice for businesses and consumers

The government must issue clear, practical ADA guidance for small businesses online. Standardized, actionable compliance requirements would reduce uncertainty and burden while ensuring consumers of all abilities have equal access to digital goods and services.

If no reforms are made, the current culture of predatory litigation could continue unchecked, leading to even more small businesses facing excessive legal threats. This cycle can force many of them to close their doors, stifling innovation and diversity in the marketplace. The exploitation of small businesses will not only harm entrepreneurs but will also limit options for consumers, reducing the very essence of what makes our marketplace dynamic.

“If a person with a disability approached me and let me know they were having difficulty with my site, I would have gone to the ends of the earth to help solve the problem,” says Clay. “We want to be accessible to more people so that we can sell more products and reach more customers. It's mutually beneficial for us to have a more accessible site.”

True accessibility progress comes from collaboration and clear standards, not from lawyers who treat the ADA as a revenue stream at the expense of entrepreneurs and the disability community they claim to represent.

Promoting access and protecting businesses are not mutually exclusive goals. A better future is one in which society can support both.

*Merchants are referred to by first name only to protect their privacy.