3 ms·
> But these suits put their targets in an impossible situation. Unless this Court steps in now, defendants must retool their websites to comply with Title III w
by Invictus0 7y ago
> But these suits put their targets in an impossible situation. Unless this Court steps in now, defendants must retool their websites to comply with Title III without any guidance on what accessibility in the online environment means for individuals with the variety of disabilities covered by the ADA
I'm with Dominos. No reasonable person would expect a website to support people with disabilities; the web is still the totally unregulated wild west it was 20 years ago. Just because it would be nice to have a web that supports people with disabilities doesn't mean you can have the Supreme Court will the requisite regulation into existence, nor does the existence of some informal accessibility standards mean that they should be enforceable by law. It is the job of Congress to update the ADA into the 21st century, and until they do that, the court should not force businesses to comply with the yet-to-be-written regulations.
- qtplatypus 7y agoThe ADA says that businesses have to be accessible. It isn't written with regards to any technology etc. So the Supreme Court can interpret the law as meaning that it covers the internet. Just like if I invent a novel poison and use it to kill someone it doesn't stop being murder because no one knew about that poison when the law against murder was being written. There have been web accessibility guidelines since 1995 and WCAG 2.0 aka ISO/IEC 40500:2012 has been around since 2012. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation act incorporates those guidelines so if you are following those rules you should be safe.