By Minh N. Vu
Seyfarth Synopsis: We predict 2022 will look a lot like 2021 with roughly the same number of lawsuits and DOJ pushing the boundaries of the ADA.
Like 2020, 2021 was a tough year for businesses. Still dealing with the constantly-changing COVID-19 landscape, businesses were also bombarded with what may be another record number of ADA Title III federal lawsuits as well as rejuvenated U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) enforcement activities. Here are our predictions for 2022.
DOJ Enforcement Activities. After little activity in the Trump era (except for the significant withdrawal of the web accessibility rulemaking effort), as we predicted, the new Biden Administration DOJ ramped up enforcement activity in 2021 and is pushing the law’s boundaries. For example, in two recent settlements concerning vaccine websites of two retailers, the DOJ required conformance with WCAG 2.1 AA, even though the legal standard for the accessibility of its own websites and those of other federal agencies (under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act) is WCAG 2.0 AA. (DOJ has yet to issue regulations adopting any version of the WCAG for public accommodations websites and there is no pending rulemaking to do so.) As another example, at the end of 2021, DOJ sued a chain of 23 medical eye centers that provide eye care and outpatient surgery for not having personnel to lift patients who cannot independently transfer onto exam chairs or surgery tables. The Biden DOJ also filed four Statements of Interest in pending lawsuits in support of ADA plaintiffs within twelve months – a dramatic change from the Trump DOJ which rarely weighed in on any ADA issues. We expect in 2022 and beyond that the DOJ will continue to be more aggressive in its enforcement of Title III of the ADA, try to expand the reach of the ADA, and be more supportive of plaintiffs in their private lawsuits.
Important Appellate Decisions. In April 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a Florida district court decision that grocery retailer Winn-Dixie had violated the ADA by having an inaccessible website. The Eleventh Circuit found that the website barriers in question did not prevent the plaintiff from accessing the goods and services offered at the retailer’s stores. In May 2021, the plaintiff filed a petition for rehearing en banc, which the Court granted on December 28; however the Court dismissed the appeal as moot and remanded the case to the district court to dismiss as moot as well.
On the opposite side of the country, the lodging industry is awaiting decisions from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in four cases concerning an ADA Title III regulation that requires hotels to disclose information about the accessibility of the hotel on their reservations websites. As we previously reported, one law firm in southern California filed over 565 lawsuits on behalf of a handful of plaintiffs alleging that the defendant hotels did not provide enough information about their accessible rooms and/or common areas on their reservations websites. Nearly 90 district courts have rejected the plaintiffs’ demands for more information, and four of those decisions are on appeal. How the Ninth Circuit decides these cases will impact hundreds of lawsuits that are stayed pending these appeals. Oral argument in two of the cases is scheduled for February 15, 2022.
Federal Lawsuit Filings. We are still crunching the numbers but the number of ADA Title III lawsuits filed in federal courts in 2021 will certainly top 11,000, and likely will continue that upward trajectory in 2022.
Website Accessibility Lawsuits. As we reported at the end of 2021, lawsuits concerning allegedly inaccessible websites – usually by blind plaintiffs who use screen-readers to access websites – continue to be filed at a rapid pace. The Southern District of New York is now a favored venue for the plaintiff’s bar, along with California state and federal courts. Website accessibility lawsuit activity in Florida quieted down after the Eleventh Circuit’s pro-business Winn-Dixie decision, discussed above. Perhaps as a result of this ruling, some plaintiff’s lawyers in Florida have now taken to filing their website accessibility discrimination complaints with Florida county human rights commissions instead of in federal court. The benefit of filing under state and local non-discrimination laws is that plaintiffs can recover damages, unlike under the ADA which only provides for injunctive relief.
COVID-19 Related Litigation. The pandemic and mask-wearing requirements imposed by businesses resulted in a relatively small number of lawsuits by plaintiffs alleging that they should be exempt from mask requirements because of a disability. A number of these lawsuits were dismissed early without meaningful legal analysis, but some continue to be litigated. Thus, we may see some substantive decisions this year on whether businesses have an obligation to modify their mask (and/or in some cases mandatory vaccination) policies for people with legitimate disabilities and what those modifications look like.
Revived Rulemaking for Equipment and Furniture. The Obama DOJ repeatedly stated it would propose regulations for non-fixed equipment and furniture (including hotel beds) but issued no proposed regulations during the entire eight years of the Administration. In 2017, consistent with its anti-regulation agenda, the Trump Administration pulled the plug on this rulemaking effort altogether. In December 2021, the DOJ announced that it would issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Fall of 2022 on equipment and furniture. While clear rules for beds in accessible hotel rooms would be very helpful for the hotel industry, we are not going to be holding our breath given DOJ’s prior inaction on this issue.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Access Board announced that it will issue an ANPRM for fixed self-service transaction machines, self-service kiosks, information transaction machines, and point-of-sale devices by April 2022. Since an ANPRM precedes the issuance of a proposed rule, it will be many years before there will be regulations on these self-service technologies that apply to public accommodations. Regulations issued by the Access Board are not binding on public accommodations until the DOJ (or any other federal agency) adopts them in a rulemaking of its own. It’s a two-step process that will take years. That said, the absence of regulations does not necessarily mean that self-service machines do not need to be accessible, as the DOJ previously stated in 2014.
In sum, it’s going to be a busy year for businesses on the ADA Title III front. Businesses are well-advised to review their current accessibility policies, procedures, practices, and training programs to ensure compliance with the ADA and equivalent state laws.
Edited by Kristina Launey