Partner
The California State Assembly is advancing new legislation with respect to website accessibility. For now, the proposed legislation is called Assembly Bill 1757 (“AB 1757”). On June 12, 2023, the Assembly’s Judiciary Committee advanced the AB 1757 out of committee with many important changes, including the addition of language that would require all California websites to follow Guidelines established by a private organization. These are generally called the “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines” (“WCAG”). There are three levels to the Guidelines, and AB 1757 would require conformity with WCAG version 2.1, Level AA. If enacted, AB 1757 would be the first time that conformity with the WCAG would be mandated by law. To date, the use of the WCAG has been voluntary (although the WCAG has been widely cited and used in website accessibility litigation).
AB 1757 amends California’s civil rights statute called the Unruh Act. Under AB 1757, a violation of website accessibility would be a violation of the Unruh Act and entitle a plaintiff to statutory damages and recovery of attorney’s fees. AB 1757 would also now subject web developers to liability if the websites created by them fail to conform to the WCAG.
The current version of AB 1757 DOES attempt to provide businesses some protection against litigation by creating a new kind of job called a “professional reviewer” and mandating a burden-shifting mechanism in some cases. A “professional reviewer” is defined as:
” … an expert in internet website design and accessibility who has a professional certificate in internet website accessibility issued by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), a certificate as a Certified Professional in Web Accessibility (CPWA) issued by the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP), or a certification issued by another source of professional training for front-end internet website developers with criteria for issuance that are equivalent to, or higher than, the requirements for the issuance of a CPWA certificate.”
AB 1757 provides that a website is presumed to be legally compliant and accessible if the website obtains a certification from a “professional reviewer” — every 12 months — that certifies that:
If a website owner has such a certification, then the burden-shifting mechanism is applied. If the certification is proven by the preponderance of the evidence, then the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the website does NOT, in fact, comply with the standards required by AB 1757.
In its current form, AB 1757 does not mandate web accessibility standards for stand-only, internet-only businesses. Indeed, AB 1757 specifically states that it does not “… [r]esolve, or otherwise address, whether an internet website that is a standalone website-only business and not associated with a business that has a physical location in California is subject to liability under …” the Unruh Act. It is also unclear how AB 1757 would impact a case like Gomez v. Trinitas Cellars, LLC., Case No. 3:21-cv-09006 (US Dist. Court, N.D. California, June 17, 2022), where the court held that not every element and aspect of a website had to conform to web-accessibility standards.
Contact the Web Accessibility Attorneys at Revision Legal
For more information, contact the experienced Web Accessibility Lawyers at Revision Legal. You can contact us through the form on this page or call (855) 473-8474.
Congress recently passed the Take It Down Act (“TIDA”), and the law was signed by the President in mid-May 2025. See AP media report here. Interestingly enough, “Take It Down” is an acronym for “Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks Act.” TIDA prohibits what is commonly called “revenge […]
Read more about Take it Down Act: Ban on “Revenge Porn” Goes National
Receiving a Notice of Suspension from Amazon — or any online sales platform like Walmart — can be devastating. But you have options and, in some cases, you can have the decision reversed and be “up and running” within 24 hours. The best option is to consult with an Amazon Suspension Appeal attorney like the […]
Read more about Amazon Suspension Appeals: What to Do and Not to Do
Under U.S. trademark laws, there is a legal concept called the “Doctrine of Foreign Equivalence”(“DFE”). Essentially, the DFE prevents the registration of trademarks that violate U.S. trademark rules where foreign language words are used instead of English language words that have the same meaning. Thus, “blaue Milchviehbetriebe” and “fermes laitières bleues” are not registerable since […]
Read more about U.S. Trademarking: What is the Doctrine of Foreign Equivalence?