ADA Title II Web Accessibility Rule: Current Status

Current regulatory status

The U.S. Department of Justice published its final rule amending ADA Title II regulations on April 24, 2024, adding Subpart H to 28 CFR Part 35 and adopting WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard for digital content of state and local government entities (Source: 28 CFR Part 35, Subpart H ) . Compliance deadlines were set based on population served:

• April 24, 2026. Public entities serving 50,000 or more people. This deadline has now passed.
• April 26, 2027. Public entities serving fewer than 50,000 people, and all special district governments regardless of population.

On February 13, 2026, DOJ submitted an Interim Final Rule (IFR) to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) under Regulatory Identifier Number 1190-AA82. As of the last review of this page, OIRA review was still pending and no public text of the IFR had been released.

What the OIRA submission means

OIRA, part of the White House Office of Management and Budget, reviews significant regulatory actions before they are issued publicly. A submission to OIRA does not by itself change the existing rule; it signals that DOJ has drafted an amendment, delay, or rescission and is seeking executive-branch coordination before publication.

Public dockets typically show the submission, the date received, and the agency's classification of the action (economically significant, other significant, etc.). They do not show the text of the rule until OIRA concludes its review and the rule is published in the Federal Register.

Possible outcomes

Until the IFR text is published, the substance of the change is not knowable. Three categories of outcome are possible based on the public posture of the submission:

Modification

The IFR may narrow the scope of covered content, extend exceptions (e.g., broadening the "archived web content" or "preexisting electronic documents" categories), or carve out specific entity types. Existing deadlines and the WCAG 2.1 AA technical standard could remain in force for most covered content while specific provisions are softened.

Delay

The IFR may push the April 26, 2027 deadline outward for entities under 50,000 population and special districts, giving smaller and lower-capacity entities additional time. The April 24, 2026 deadline for large entities is already past and cannot be unwound retroactively.

Rescission

The IFR may rescind Subpart H entirely, removing the codified WCAG 2.1 AA technical standard from federal regulation. This would not eliminate the underlying ADA Title II nondiscrimination obligation, which exists in statute (42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.), not in this rule. See What this does not change.

What this does not change

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act has prohibited disability-based discrimination by state and local government entities since 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.). DOJ has interpreted this nondiscrimination obligation to require communications "as effective as" those provided to people without disabilities, including in digital contexts. That obligation does not depend on the 2024 rule and would persist if the rule were rescinded.

Before the April 2024 final rule, DOJ enforced web accessibility through settlement agreements that referenced WCAG (typically WCAG 2.0 AA, sometimes WCAG 2.1 AA) as the de facto standard. Those settlements remain valid law-of-the-case for the entities involved, and DOJ retains authority to bring new enforcement actions under the underlying statute.

Three things remain in force regardless of the rule's fate:

1. The Title II nondiscrimination obligation in 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.
2. Existing DOJ settlement agreements with specific entities.
3. State-level digital accessibility laws (see State laws as a regulatory floor).

Private litigation landscape

Private ADA accessibility litigation in federal court has continued at a high volume independent of regulatory activity. According to Seyfarth Shaw's annual ADA Title III Federal Lawsuit Report, 8,667 federal ADA accessibility suits were filed in 2025 (Source: Seyfarth Shaw ADA Title III Federal Lawsuit Report, 2025 ) .

Most of these are Title III suits brought against private businesses, not Title II suits brought against public entities. However, the same plaintiffs' bar that drives Title III litigation also files Title II complaints, and the underlying legal theories (failure to provide accessible digital content) are similar. OCR complaints, filed administratively rather than in court, are an additional and separate enforcement channel for public entities.

State laws as a regulatory floor

Several states have enacted digital accessibility requirements that apply to state and local public entities independently of the federal rule. These laws create a regulatory floor that persists regardless of federal activity.

• Colorado HB21-1110 requires all state agencies to meet WCAG 2.1 AA conformance and provides for penalties of up to $3,500 per violation. The law took effect for state agencies on July 1, 2024.
• California Government Code § 11135 and § 7405 require state and certain local entities to provide accessible electronic and information technology. California's proposed AB 1757 (which would have mandated WCAG 2.1 AA and created a private right of action) died in committee in August 2024, but the underlying Government Code provisions remain in force.
• CCCCO Memo ESS 26-17 (February 27, 2026) directs all California community college districts to meet WCAG 2.1 AA for digital documents and explicitly identifies PDFs, Word files, Excel files, LMS content, SharePoint, email, HR portals, and social media as in scope. This is a Chancellor's Office directive, separate from any federal rule.

Additional states have introduced bills or adopted procurement requirements; this list is not exhaustive. Entities should consult counsel for state-specific obligations.

What entities should do now

The practical guidance for state and local entities does not change based on the OIRA submission. Three steps remain appropriate regardless of how the IFR resolves:

1. Inventory digital assets. A defensible compliance posture requires knowing what content the entity publishes: public-facing websites, mobile apps, portals, learning management systems, document libraries, and third-party-hosted content. Inventory work is useful under any version of the rule and under state law obligations.
2. Triage by risk and use. Documents and pages that are frequently accessed, recently published, or carry legal weight (board minutes, agendas, forms, catalogs, financial reports) carry higher priority than archived or rarely accessed content. This prioritization does not depend on which version of the rule is in effect.
3. Maintain a documented compliance plan. Even if the federal rule is delayed or rescinded, a documented plan demonstrates good-faith effort and reduces exposure to private litigation and OCR complaints under the underlying statute.

Update history

• 2026-05-26. Page published. Reflects OIRA submission of February 13, 2026; no IFR text public as of this date.

This page is updated whenever there is a material development: OIRA publication, court decision, DOJ announcement, or state law change. Dated entries are appended rather than rewriting earlier text, so the page reflects what was known when.