WCAG 2.2 AA · Automated Scanning
Texas website accessibility law: what the numbers actually show, and why Texas is different.
Texas is a real exception to the national pattern. Federal Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act still applies to Texas businesses the same as anywhere else, but Texas does not appear by name in national tracking of state-by-state federal website accessibility lawsuits, unlike New York, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania, all of which show up with specific, rising counts. That is largely because the Fifth Circuit, which covers Texas, has taken a more skeptical view of who is allowed to bring these claims. That does not mean zero risk. It means a genuinely different risk profile than the states most often written about. Here is what that actually looks like if you run a site based in, or selling to, Texas.
Last updated October 2026.
Enter your URL. See your Texas site's accessibility status. 60 seconds.
Why the Fifth Circuit changes the picture in Texas
Most website accessibility lawsuits depend on a plaintiff having legal standing to sue, meaning a real, concrete reason they were personally harmed. A category of plaintiff known as a “tester,” someone who visits websites specifically looking for violations rather than to actually use the business, has become central to a lot of this litigation nationally.
In December 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court took up a case addressing exactly this question, Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, which concerned a hotel booking website's failure to describe accessible room features. The Court ultimately found the case moot and did not decide the underlying standing question, leaving a real split between federal circuits. In the Fifth Circuit, which covers Texas, courts have generally required a plaintiff to show more than the Second and Tenth Circuits also require, and considerably more than the Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, where tester standing has been upheld. Practically, that means a Texas court is a harder venue for a pure tester lawsuit than a New York or Florida court, at least for this specific type of claim.
Texas also has its own disability rights statute, the Texas Human Resources Code (Chapter 121), which guarantees people with disabilities equal access to public facilities. It was written in 1979, well before the internet existed, and its definitions focus on physical spaces. We found no clear evidence that it has been applied to websites the way New York's, Illinois's, or Minnesota's newer human rights laws have. In practice, most Texas claims that do proceed rely on federal ADA Title III alone.
None of this eliminates legal exposure. It changes its shape. A Texas business that also sells into New York, Florida, or Illinois still carries the fuller exposure those states create, and federal ADA Title III liability does not disappear just because a plaintiff's standing is harder to establish in this particular circuit.
What the filing data actually shows for Texas
Texas does not appear by name in Seyfarth Shaw's state-by-state breakdown of federal website accessibility lawsuits for 2024 or 2025, the same primary source cited on Axeazy's other state pages. States with far smaller populations, including Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, all show up with specific counts. Texas's absence from that particular list is itself the data point.
Texas does show up with 177 cases in a separate, broader Seyfarth Shaw report covering all federal ADA Title III filings, which includes physical accessibility claims (ramps, parking, entrances) alongside website claims. That combined figure suggests real ADA activity in Texas overall, just concentrated somewhere other than pure website litigation.
Typical demand-letter and settlement ranges
Typical demand-letter and settlement ranges, per defense-side reporting rather than any official court record: commonly $10,000 to $40,000 where a claim does proceed, with cases that are ignored or escalate to active litigation tending toward the higher end or beyond, on top of separate legal fees either way. Axeazy does not predict the outcome of any individual case.
Source: Seyfarth Shaw's 2025 ADA Title III tracking reports (both the website-specific and the all-filing-types breakdowns).
Which Texas businesses still carry real exposure
Multi-state operations
A Texas business that also sells to customers in New York, Florida, or Illinois is fully exposed to those states' more active litigation environments regardless of what the Fifth Circuit does. Standing rules are set by where a case is filed, not where the defendant is based.
Industry
Where Texas claims do occur, retail and e-commerce sites see the most activity.
Venue
Where filings do occur in Texas, activity has grown in the state's Southern and Northern federal districts, though from a small base relative to the states above.
If you have received a demand letter and are not sure what happens next, see the step by step walkthrough on what an ADA demand letter actually asks for and how to respond, regardless of which state it references.
Axeazy fixes 14 categories of WCAG violations at the code level, not with an overlay widget, including the alt text, form label, and color contrast issues most often cited in demand letters. See what Axeazy fixes and what it does not.
Texas website accessibility: FAQ.
Is Texas safe from website accessibility lawsuits?
No, but the risk profile is measurably different from most other states. Federal ADA Title III still applies fully to Texas businesses. What is different is that the Fifth Circuit has made a specific category of plaintiff, known as a tester, harder to bring certain claims.
Do small businesses in Texas have to meet website accessibility requirements?
Federal ADA Title III applies regardless of business size. Texas's own disability rights statute focuses on physical public facilities and predates the internet, so it does not add a clear website-specific requirement the way some other states' newer human rights laws do.
Why doesn't Texas show up in national ADA website lawsuit data?
Texas does not appear by name in Seyfarth Shaw's state-by-state breakdown of federal website accessibility lawsuits for 2024 or 2025, even though smaller states do. The most likely explanation is the Fifth Circuit's stricter approach to tester standing following a Supreme Court case that left the broader question unresolved in 2023.
What does a Texas accessibility demand letter usually ask for?
Where Texas letters occur, they usually rely on federal Title III alone, since Texas's own Human Resources Code has not been applied to websites. Because the Fifth Circuit looks harder at tester plaintiffs than most circuits, whether the sender ever tried to use your site as a real customer is a fair question for your attorney.
See what is actually wrong with your site.
Free, 60 second scan. No credit card required.
Scope of this analysis
SCOPE LIMITATION: This report documents violations identified by automated WCAG 2.2 AA scanning using axe-core v4.11.0. Automated tools identify approximately 30 to 40% of all WCAG criteria. This report does not constitute legal advice, guarantee ADA compliance, or protect against legal action. ADA compliance is a legal determination made by courts. For full WCAG conformance assessment, engage an IAAP-certified accessibility professional.
Sources: Seyfarth Shaw, “Federal Court Website Accessibility Lawsuit Filings Bounce Back in 2025” (March 2026); Seyfarth Shaw, “ADA Title III Federal Lawsuit Filings Fall Slightly to 8,667 in 2025” (February 2026); Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, 601 U.S. 1 (2023); Houston v. Marod Supermarkets, 733 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2013); Texas Human Resources Code, Chapter 121.
Georgia and Ohio are the other states here that do not appear in national website lawsuit counts, and Florida shows how differently these claims play out in a circuit that accepts tester standing. See Georgia website accessibility law, Ohio website accessibility law, Florida lawsuit data, or all 10 states Axeazy tracks to check where else your business might have exposure.