The federal rule that made headlines around website accessibility in 2024 applies to state and local government websites, not private businesses. That distinction gets lost constantly in how it's reported, and it's worth being precise about, both to avoid unnecessary alarm and because the underlying reasons to care about accessibility have nothing to do with that specific rule anyway.
What the 2024 rule actually says, and who it covers
The Department of Justice's rule requires state and local government websites and apps to meet WCAG 2.1, Level AA, a widely recognized technical accessibility standard. It applies specifically to government entities: agencies, public schools, courts, transit systems, and similar. It does not apply to private businesses, including small business websites. The original compliance deadlines, tied to population size, have since been extended via an April 2026 interim rule to April 2027 and April 2028 depending on the government entity's size.
Why private businesses should still care
Even though this specific rule doesn't cover you, two separate things do matter:
- Courts have applied the ADA to websites for years, independent of this rule, and accessibility lawsuits against private businesses have been rising, with tens of thousands of website-accessibility legal filings tracked in recent years. Courts hearing these cases commonly treat WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the practical benchmark, even without a formal regulation requiring it for private business.
- Accessibility is genuinely useful, independent of any legal risk. A site that works with a screen reader, that has enough color contrast to read in bright sunlight, and that can be navigated by keyboard serves real visitors, including older customers and anyone dealing with a temporary limitation like a broken arm or bad lighting.
The basics that cover most of the ground
- Alt text on meaningful images. A brief, accurate description of what the image shows, not left blank and not stuffed with keywords. See before-and-after photos: how to show your work online for a specific example of this done well.
- Enough color contrast between text and its background. Light gray text on a white background looks clean in a mockup and is genuinely hard to read for a lot of real visitors.
- Keyboard navigation that works. Someone who can't use a mouse should still be able to tab through links, buttons and forms in a sensible order.
- Form fields with real labels. A field that only shows placeholder text that disappears once you start typing leaves a screen reader user with no idea what they're filling in.
- Descriptive link text. "Click here" tells a screen reader user nothing about where a link goes; "See our water heater pricing" does.
- Captions on any video with spoken content.
A reasonable way to start
You don't need a full technical audit to make real progress. Check your own site with a keyboard alone, tabbing through it without touching a mouse, and see where you get stuck. Run a page through a free automated checker, which catches a meaningful share of common issues like missing alt text and poor contrast, even though it won't catch everything a full manual review would.
Questions
Do I need to hire an accessibility consultant?
For most small business sites, addressing the basics above covers a large share of common issues. A consultant or a full audit becomes worth considering for a larger, more complex site or if a specific concern has already come up.
Does accessibility work conflict with a bold, distinctive design?
No. Contrast, clear structure and readable text are compatible with strong visual design; they're constraints, not the opposite of good design.
Is an automated accessibility checker enough on its own?
It catches a real, useful subset of issues but misses things that require a human judgment call, like whether alt text actually describes an image well or whether a keyboard tab order makes logical sense.