Why E-Commerce Sites Are Still the Most Sued

In 2025, 5,100 digital accessibility lawsuits were filed in the United States. That is a 20% increase from 2024. For a retail site owner, the most striking part of that number is that nearly 70% of those cases targeted e-commerce.

While a hospital or a local government might get sued for a lack of digital access, the retail sector is the primary focus for plaintiffs. This is not because lawyers hate shopping. It is because e-commerce sites are technically more complex than a standard informational blog or a corporate homepage.

Every step of a digital purchase, from finding a product to entering credit card details, is a potential legal trigger.

The numbers behind the litigation surge

E-commerce has been the top target for years, but the gap between retail and other industries is widening. According to 2025 mid-year data from EcomBack, the breakdown of lawsuits by industry shows a heavy concentration in consumer-facing digital transactions:

• E-commerce/Retail: 70%
• Food Service: 21%
• Healthcare: 2%
• Education: 2%
• Travel/Hospitality: 2%

New York remains the busiest state for these filings, accounting for 637 lawsuits in the first half of 2025 alone. However, Florida has nearly doubled its filings to 487 cases in the same period, surpassing California.

There is a common misconception that only the biggest brands like Amazon or GNC are at risk. In reality, 82% of the top 500 e-commerce retailers have already been sued at least once since 2018. Because the "big" targets have already been hit, plaintiff firms are moving down the list. Most companies currently receiving lawsuits have annual revenues under $25 million.

Why the shopping cart is a legal liability

An e-commerce site is not a static document. It is a collection of dynamic tools. For a person using a screen reader or navigating via a keyboard, these tools often break.

The checkout flow

A standard blog post only requires a user to read. An e-commerce site requires a user to interact with forms, dropdowns, and buttons. If a "Place Order" button is not labeled correctly in the code, a blind user might only hear "button" without knowing what it does.

Common failures include:

1. Form labels: Form fields that lack a <label> tag. A user might know they need to type something, but they do not know if the box is for a ZIP code or a CVV number.
2. Error handling: When a credit card is declined, many sites just turn the border of the box red. A blind user cannot see the color change. If there is no text-based alert that the screen reader can announce, the user is stuck in a loop.
3. Keyboard traps: Some checkout pop-ups do not allow a user to "tab" into them or "esc" out of them. If you cannot use a mouse, you are effectively locked out of the transaction.

Dynamic content and filters

E-commerce sites use "facets" or filters to help people find products. When you click a checkbox for "Size: Large," the page usually refreshes the product list without a full page reload.

To a sighted user, this is a smooth experience. To a screen reader user, it is silent. Unless the developer uses "Live Regions" (ARIA attributes that tell the computer to announce changes), the user has no idea that the list of products just changed from 500 items to 5.

The failure of the quick fix

Many store owners try to solve this with "accessibility widgets" or overlays. These are small icons, often a blue stick figure, that promise to make a site compliant with one click.

Data from 2024 and 2025 shows these do not prevent lawsuits. In the first half of 2025, 456 lawsuits were filed against websites that already had an accessibility widget installed.

The trade-off for using these tools is that they often interfere with the very assistive technology they claim to help. Some widgets actually make it harder for a screen reader to parse the page. In 2025, the FTC reached a $1 million settlement with accessiBe over claims that its marketing misled businesses about the level of protection provided.

Lessons from Gomez v. GNC

One of the most cited examples in recent accessibility history is Gomez v. General Nutrition Corporation (GNC). Andres Gomez, who is legally blind, sued GNC because he could not add items to his cart or use the store locator.

GNC attempted to defend itself by using automated testing tools like WAVE to show they had "zero errors." The court rejected this. The judge found that automated tests are only a starting point and do not prove a site is actually usable by a human with a disability. GNC had previously settled a similar case and agreed to meet WCAG 2.0 Level AA standards, but they failed to maintain those standards as the site updated.

This case highlights a major limitation for retailers: compliance is not a one-time project. Every time a marketing team adds a new hero banner, a holiday pop-up, or a new third-party review plugin, the site's accessibility can break.

The cost of a demand letter

For a small e-commerce business, the financial impact of a lawsuit is rarely about a massive court-ordered fine. It is about the settlement and the legal fees.

A typical settlement for a small to mid-sized retailer ranges from $5,000 to $25,000. That does not include the cost of your own defense attorney or the mandatory cost of fixing the website.

Geographic expansion and new laws

While the ADA is a federal law, state-level laws are driving the current wave of litigation. In California, the Unruh Civil Rights Act allows plaintiffs to seek statutory damages of $4,000 per violation, plus attorney fees. This makes it a high-incentive environment for plaintiff firms.

The legal landscape is also changing internationally. The European Accessibility Act (EAA) became enforceable in June 2025. This requires any business—even those based in the U.S.—that sells digital goods or services to EU citizens to meet strict accessibility standards. If your Shopify store ships to Berlin or Paris, you are now subject to EU enforcement.

Real world barriers: The Shopify and WordPress problem

Most e-commerce sites run on platforms like Shopify (32.4% of sued sites) or WordPress (20% of sued sites). The platforms themselves are generally capable of being accessible, but the themes and "apps" users install are not.

A typical Shopify store uses a third-party theme for the layout and five to ten apps for things like "Frequently Bought Together" carousels, size guides, or currency converters. Often, these apps are built by small developers who do not prioritize ARIA labels or keyboard focus. When a merchant installs a non-compliant app, they are the ones who get sued, not the app developer.

Verification steps for site owners

If you want to know if a site is a target, you can perform three basic checks without any specialized software:

1. The Tab Test: Use only the "Tab" key to navigate from the homepage to the final "Thank You" page. If the "blue box" focus indicator disappears, or if you cannot click a button using "Enter," the site is non-compliant.
2. The No-Color Test: Check if all information is conveyed without color. For example, if a size is "out of stock" and the only indicator is that the text turned gray, that is a violation.
3. The Zoom Test: Increase the browser zoom to 200%. If the text overlaps or the checkout button disappears off the screen, it fails WCAG Level AA.

E-commerce sites are the most sued because they are the most functional. They are a series of complex tasks disguised as a webpage. Until retailers treat accessibility as a core part of their technical infrastructure rather than a "plugin" or a one-off fix, the litigation numbers will continue to rise.

If you want to check your own risk level, I can help you identify specific WCAG 2.2 failures in your checkout flow or review your current accessibility statement for legal gaps.