Another important consideration is that the ADA does not allow businesses to simply provide an alternative such as a phone number. Lastly, include accessibility issues as part of your website and mobile strategy. When new technologies are implemented or pages added, part of the process should include the implications for persons with disabilities. 
These rules nearly made their way to the Supreme Court in 2019. In 2016 a web accessibility civil suit was filed against Dominos Pizza. In the following years, the case filtered through layers of judgements and appeals, and Dominos eventually appealed to the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court declined the case and returned it to a lower court. Though this provides no final clarification, the ruling by a lower court in favor of the plaintiff supports the legal requirements for web accessibility.
The 2014 case involving Peapod, an online grocery retailer emphasizes that being ADA compliant goes beyond your website. The settlement required Peapod to make its mobile applications accessible by March 2015 and its website accessible by September 2015. Since mobile apps are fast becoming the preferred method of online shopping, e-commerce sites must focus on app accessibility too. 
Additionally, in February 2018, Congress passed the ADA Education and Reform Act, a bill designed to make it harder for disabled Americans to sue businesses for discrimination. Republican lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill argue that the law will help curb “frivolous” lawsuits, while opponents have argued that this law will gut the ADA, essentially giving businesses little reason to follow the ADA guidelines at all.
The WCAG guidelines were updated from version 2.0 to 2.1 in June 2018. The updates in 2.1 cover changes in technology that have occurred since the previous version, and also address areas that were underrepresented in 2.0. What does this mean for you? Not a lot right now. The compliance level targeted is still WCAG 2.0 Level AA, and the 2.1 success criteria are in addition to those already existing in 2.0.

Most recently, however, pizza chain Domino's has been brought under suit for their website not being accessible for specialty ordering. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to review the case, instead upholding the decision of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who said the “alleged inaccessibility of Domino’s website and app impedes access to the goods and services of its physical pizza franchises—which are places of public accommodation.”
×