Legal Questions
- Is there a legal requirement that University Websites be accessible?
- Why can’t the University offer accommodations on a case by case basis rather than requiring its Websites to be accessible?
- Have there been legal challenges involving Website accessibility at colleges or universities?
- Doesn’t the law allow a university to meet its obligations by providing an alternative accessible way for individuals with disabilities to access its programs or services rather than mandating Website accessibility?
- Is the University subject to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973? Is that the relevant standard a court would use to measure Website accessibility?
Is there a legal requirement that University Websites be accessible?
Yes. Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“Title II”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”) require that public universities provide qualified individuals with disabilities equal access to their programs, services, and activities unless doing so would fundamentally alter the nature of their programs, services, or activities or would impose an undue burden. As part of that obligation, public universities are required to provide effective communication to persons with disabilities, regardless of whether the university generally communicates through print media, audio media, or computerized media such as the Internet. Universities that use the Internet for communication regarding their programs, goods, and services must make that information accessible.
Why can’t the University offer accommodations on a case by case basis rather than requiring its Websites to be accessible?
The United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) is responsible for enforcing Section 504 with respect to complaints filed against public institutions of higher education. The OCR has opined on several occasions that a public entity violates its obligations under the ADA when it simply responds to individual requests for accommodation on an ad-hoc basis. A public entity has an affirmative duty to establish a comprehensive policy in compliance with Title II in advance of any request for auxiliary aids or services.
On a practical level, accessibility experts have determined that it generally takes less time and is less costly to include accessibility as a design parameter from the start, rather than attempting to “retrofit” web sites after a complaint has been filed.
Have there been legal challenges involving Website accessibility at colleges or universities?
There are currently no reported court cases involving website accessibility at colleges or universities. However, OCR has investigated complaints of disability discrimination involving website accessibility at several colleges and universities. As a result of its investigations, OCR has entered into remediation plans requiring that those institutions ensure comparable access to students with disabilities to university websites and develop campus-wide accessibility standards.
Doesn’t the law allow a university to meet its obligations by providing an alternative accessible way for individuals with disabilities to access its programs or services rather than mandating Website accessibility?
Title II and Section 504 require that public universities take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with persons with disabilities are “as effective” as communications with others. Thus, the issue is the extent to which the communication is actually “as effective” as that provided to others. OCR has repeatedly held that the term “communication” in this context means the transfer of information, including but not limited to, the verbal presentation of a lecture, the printed text of a book, and the resources of the Internet.
In assessing whether communication is effective, OCR has identified three basic components: timeliness of delivery, accuracy of the translation, and the abilities of the individual with the disability. With respect to the timeliness component, OCR has noted that a computer user with a disability may want to access the web during approximately the same number of hours with the same spontaneous flexibility that is enjoyed by nondisabled users. While an institution with an inaccessible website might attempt to meet its legal obligations by offering an alternative method of accessing the institution’s programs or services (such as a staffed telephone line), such an opportunity may not be considered “as effective” by regulatory agencies as a web based service because it is not available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Is the University subject to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973? Is that the relevant standard a court would use to measure Website accessibility?
Section 508 was implemented in 1998 as part of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to require that all electronic and information technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the Federal government be accessible to persons with disabilities. Colleges and universities are generally not subject to Section 508, although some federal grants may require compliance with Section 508 as a condition of the grant. When reviewing a complaint regarding website accessibility, a court is not required to use a particular set of standards to measure accessibility (such as those set forth in Section 508 or the World Wide Web Consortium). On the other hand, most web accessibility policies adopted by colleges and universities are based on one or both of these two standards and provide a useful standard against which to measure compliance with the ADA and Section 504.
