New Page

E-commerce websites account for 77 percent of all ADA digital accessibility lawsuits . Shopify stores alone represent more than 30 percent of platform-identified cases .

In 2023, 8,800 ADA Title III lawsuits were filed in federal courts—a 7 percent increase from the previous year. Of those, 2,452 were specifically website accessibility cases . The first half of 2025 saw 2,014 lawsuits filed, a 37 percent increase year over year.

The food and beverage and restaurant sectors faced over 1,300 lawsuits in 2025, but retail and e-commerce weren't far behind. The concentration matters more than the total. Plaintiffs' lawyers know exactly what to look for, and automated scanning tools make finding violations trivial.

Why fashion retail gets targeted

Fashion e-commerce sites have characteristics that make them particularly vulnerable.

Product images are essential. A clothing site without photos doesn't work. But each image needs alternative text for screen reader users. If you have 500 products with five images each, that's 2,500 potential violations. Missing alt text is the most common accessibility failure in Shopify stores .

Navigation is complex. Category filters, size selectors, color swatches, sorting options—each interactive element must work with keyboard-only control. Users with motor disabilities who cannot use a mouse need to tab through every function. If a dropdown menu only appears on hover, keyboard users can't open it.

Checkout flows have multiple steps. Form fields, shipping options, payment information—each step must be properly labeled and error messages clearly communicated. According to the WebAIM Million report, 48.6 percent of homepages have missing form labels .

Color contrast is often sacrificed for aesthetics. Fashion brands love light gray text on white backgrounds. It looks clean. It also fails WCAG's 4.5:1 contrast requirement for normal text . The WebAIM Million found that 81 percent of homepages have low-contrast text .

The three issues that get e-commerce sites sued

TestParty's analysis of litigation data identifies three accessibility problems that account for the vast majority of retail lawsuits .

Missing or inadequate alt text. Screen reader users cannot see your product photos. They rely entirely on alt text descriptions. When alt text is missing, the screen reader might announce the filename ("SKU-12345-front.jpg") or simply say "image." Neither helps a blind customer understand what you're selling.

Good alt text describes what a sighted user would see and need to know to make a purchase decision. "Women's black leather ankle boot with 2-inch block heel and side zipper" works. "Product image" doesn't .

For large catalogs, systematic approaches help. Create formulas for each product category: "[Color] [Material] [Product Type] with [Distinguishing Features]." Use AI tools to generate drafts, then review and refine. Start with bestsellers and highest-traffic pages .

Broken or inaccessible navigation. Keyboard accessibility is a core WCAG requirement. Users who cannot operate a mouse must be able to access every function using only a keyboard .

The tab test reveals problems quickly. Put your mouse aside and try to complete a purchase using only your keyboard. Press Tab repeatedly to move through the page. Watch for a visible focus indicator showing which element is selected. Try to open navigation menus, apply product filters, add an item to your cart, complete checkout.

If you get stuck anywhere—can't open a menu, can't select an option, can't see where you are on the page—you've found an accessibility barrier .

Common navigation failures include hover-only menus that never appear for keyboard users, missing focus indicators, modal windows that trap keyboard focus, and clickable elements built with <div> or <span> tags instead of proper <button> or <a> elements .

Poor color contrast. Visual design choices directly impact whether users with low vision, color blindness, or cognitive disabilities can read your site. Insufficient contrast between text and background is the single most common accessibility failure .

WCAG requires normal text to have a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against its background. Large text (18pt or 14pt bold) needs 3:1 minimum. Non-text elements like icons and form borders also need 3:1 contrast .

Common contrast failures in fashion retail include light gray text on white backgrounds, placeholder text in form fields that's too light to read, disabled button states that obscure unavailable options, and sale prices or badges in red text that fails against white backgrounds .

What WCAG requires for retail sites

WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the standard courts and regulators reference . For Shopify stores specifically, WCAG 2.2 Level AA is the appropriate target .

The guidelines are organized around four principles: perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust .

Perceivable means information must be presentable in ways users can perceive. Provide text alternatives for all images. Add captions for videos. Ensure sufficient color contrast .

Operable means interface components must be operable. All functionality must be available from a keyboard. Users need enough time to complete tasks. Content shouldn't cause seizures .

Understandable means information must be understandable. Text should be readable. Behavior should be predictable. Forms should help users avoid and correct mistakes .

Robust means content must work with assistive technologies. HTML should be valid. Accessibility APIs should be properly used .

For e-commerce, certain success criteria are particularly relevant :

1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A): All product images need descriptive alt text.

1.4.3 Contrast Minimum (Level AA): Text must have 4.5:1 contrast ratio against background.

2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A): All functionality must be operable via keyboard.

2.4.4 Link Purpose (Level A): Link purpose must be determinable from link text alone.

3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A): Form inputs need visible labels, not just placeholders.

4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A): Custom widgets must communicate identity and state to assistive technologies.

The Fashion Nova settlement details

The Fashion Nova case started in 2020. The plaintiff alleged the retailer's online clothing website wasn't accessible to blind users, denying them full and equal access to goods and services in violation of the ADA and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act .

In 2022, the district court certified a nationwide class and a California subclass. After years of litigation, the parties reached a proposed settlement .

The terms: Fashion Nova would pay approximately $2.43 million to California class members with valid claims, limited to $4,000 per household. Any remaining amount would go to a blind advocacy organization. Fashion Nova would also pay $2.52 million in attorneys fees and costs to plaintiffs' counsel .

For injunctive relief, Fashion Nova agreed to modify its website "as needed" to achieve substantial conformance with WCAG 2.1. It promised to adopt a website accessibility policy within 180 days. Class Counsel could, but was not required to, perform an accessibility audit at its own cost .

The DOJ objected on multiple grounds .

The injunctive relief wasn't meaningful. It was essentially a recitation of the ADA obligation with no confirmation or enforcement mechanism. The agreement didn't ensure Fashion Nova took concrete steps to make its website accessible .

The monetary payments disproportionately favored attorneys over class members. $2.52 million in fees versus $2.43 million for the class .

The settlement administrator's own website, where blind individuals would have to submit claims, was inaccessible to screen reader users. The DOJ hired a digital accessibility consultant who documented various barriers .

And Class Counsel had filed the same lawsuit in over 500 cases between 2019 and 2023, with most ending in confidential individual settlements .

The DOJ urged the court to reject the settlement as not fair, reasonable, or adequate to remedy disability-based discrimination .

What retailers need to do

Carhartt WIP's February 2026 accessibility statement shows what transparency looks like. They list specific known issues: low contrast on several pages, meta viewport preventing zoom, invalid ARIA attribute values, and lists containing inappropriate elements . They provide contact information for reporting barriers and identify the market surveillance authority.

Gabor Shoes' August 2025 statement reports full compliance based on WCAG 2.2 Level AA, with detailed descriptions of how they handle alternative texts, semantic structure, keyboard operability, contrast, and forms .

For retailers starting from scratch, here's what the data suggests.

Start with an audit. Use automated tools to catch obvious issues, but don't stop there. Manual testing with screen readers and keyboard-only navigation catches what automated tools miss.

Fix images first. Missing alt text is the most common violation and the easiest to find. Write descriptive text for every product image. Use templates to scale.

Test keyboard navigation. Unplug your mouse. Tab through your entire site. If you can't reach something, fix it.

Check color contrast. Review your brand palette against WCAG requirements. Light gray text probably fails. Fix it.

Document everything. Keep records of audits, fixes, and testing. If you get sued, that documentation shows good faith.

Don't rely on overlays. Nearly 25 percent of lawsuits in 2025 targeted websites using accessibility widgets . The FTC fined AccessiBe $1 million for deceptive claims . The Overlay Fact Sheet, signed by more than 700 accessibility professionals, states plainly that overlays don't fix underlying code problems.

If you use Shopify, know what's your responsibility. Shopify's core checkout and some themes include foundational accessibility features, but you're responsible for your theme, your content, and your third-party apps . Most accessibility failures arise from areas the merchant controls.

The cost of doing nothing

Average lawsuit costs include $10,000 to $50,000 in settlement payments, $15,000 to $150,000 in legal defense fees, mandatory remediation requirements, and ongoing monitoring obligations . The total cost of a single lawsuit typically exceeds $30,000—far more than proactive compliance .

Forty-six percent of federal cases involve repeat defendants. Plaintiffs track litigation history. If you settle without truly fixing your site, they'll be back.

The Fashion Nova case shows that even paying millions doesn't guarantee resolution if the underlying accessibility issues aren't addressed. The DOJ is watching. Courts are watching. Settlement agreements without meaningful injunctive relief face scrutiny.

The market opportunity

Beyond legal protection, accessibility expands your addressable market. According to CDC data, 28.7 percent of US adults—more than 70 million people—have some form of disability . The World Economic Forum reports that the global spending power of people with disabilities and their families exceeds $13 trillion annually .

Seventy-five percent of disabled people and their families have walked away from a business due to poor accessibility . Inaccessible stores actively drive away customers.

Accessible websites also see improved SEO performance. The W3C's business case documentation notes that accessibility improvements benefit search engine crawlers, with accessible sites seeing 23 percent more organic traffic on average .

The bottom line

Retail and fashion e-commerce sites are sued more than any other category. The reasons are structural: lots of images, complex navigation, aesthetic design choices that sacrifice contrast, and high transaction volumes.

The Fashion Nova case changed the landscape. The DOJ's February 2026 statement of interest made clear that settlement payments alone aren't enough. Actual accessibility improvements are required. Courts will scrutinize whether injunctive relief is meaningful. Settlement administrator websites need to be accessible too.

Serial plaintiffs and their law firms have filed tens of thousands of cases. Automated scanning tools make finding violations trivial. The law firms know what to look for, and they have refined their complaints over years of litigation.

The retailers that avoid repeat lawsuits do comprehensive remediation, not surface fixes. They test with actual assistive technology. They train staff to maintain accessibility when adding new content. They treat it as ongoing operational expense, not a one-time legal cost.

Start with an audit. Fix images. Test keyboard navigation. Check contrast. Document everything. And if you get sued, call a lawyer who actually defends these cases, not someone who just sends demand letters.

The money you spend on compliance is less than the money you'll spend on one lawsuit. And your customers—all of them—will actually be able to buy your clothes.