Editor’s Note: Today’s post is by Latia Ward. Latia is is a Research Librarian at the Arthur J. Morris Law Library at the University of Virginia School of Law, where she teaches Advanced Legal Research.
In a blog post this past June, I provided an overview of the final rule issued by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on April 24, 2024, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities (a rule which was codified with its definitions in the Code of Federal Regulations), addressed the “archived web content” exception to the rule, and provided two immediate steps that librarians at public entities can take to make digital content accessible: 1) auditing and remediating websites and 2) creating or updating the library’s accessibility statement.
On September 22, 2025, the DOJ announced its new regulatory agenda in the Federal Register. This new regulatory agenda will affect the final rule, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities, in that the DOJ will “publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to reconsider whether some of the regulatory provisions imposed by the April 24, 2024, rule could be made less costly.” The date for publication of this NPRM is “To Be Determined.”
In the meantime, the compliance dates for public entities to make their websites and other digital content accessible remain the same: public entities of 50,000 or more people are required to comply by April 24, 2026, and public entities of less than 50,000 people are required to comply by April 26, 2027. However, questions remain. In this post, I take a look at the American Library Association’s (ALA) treatment of two of its frequently asked questions about the final rule and provide two additional steps for librarians to take as they make sure their digital content is accessible.
Questions Remain
Generally, any librarian that serves the public or patrons has a role to play in content accessibility. For my part, as a librarian who teaches, I have begun making sure that there are transcripts for videos that I recommend students view as well as including captions for video content that I may show in class. Also, I have begun using accessibility checkers for documents before I post these documents to the course learning management system. However, questions remain about the other day-to-day work of librarians, for example work relating to interlibrary loan and institutional repositories.
In its New ADA Rules Explained accessibility guidance, the ALA addresses the following question: “How do the rules affect the provision of articles and chapters scanned for individual patron use through interlibrary loan and document delivery services?” While the ALA reasons that documents scanned for interlibrary loan likely do not fall under the exception in the final rule for individualized password-protected documents because these interlibrary loan documents are “not typically ABOUT that person, their property, or their account,” the ALA encourages libraries to seek legal counsel on the issue and asserts that the application of the final rule will not be clear until there is an investigation as the result of a complaint or a lawsuit.
Another question is, “How do libraries triage what needs to be made accessible and prioritize this work?” After accounting for all websites and web applications under the library’s control and then creating a team of people to strategize how to make content accessible, ALA recommends identifying the content that the library should prioritize. This content is content which is not within any exceptions to the final rule and content that is being currently used. While the ALA’s guidance provides greater detail on triaging accessibility work, I now turn to two additional steps that librarians can take.
Two Additional, Immediate Steps That Librarians Can Take
While many questions remain and some of these questions are addressed in the documentation for the final rule, and others are interpretations of how the rule may be applied by professional library organizations such as the ALA, librarians should resist the temptation to feel overwhelmed and begin (or continue!) making digital content accessible by taking incremental steps.
- First, librarians should use the “Chart for analyzing the applicability of ADA Title II exceptions to your library’s resources,” provided in Next Steps and Resources by the ALA. The chart has a section for each of the exceptions to the rule: 1) archived web content exception, 2) pre-existing conventional electronic documents exception, 3) individualized, password-protected or otherwise secured conventional electronic documents exception, 4) content posted by a third party, and 5) preexisting social media posts exception. I referenced this chart in my previous post, which appeared in the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) publication, ADA Title II regulations: implications for libraries.
- Second, librarians should continue (or begin, for those who have not started) asking vendors to make their content born-accessible. During the period for comments for the final rule, ARL expressed support for born-accessible content and outlined ways libraries were advocating for born-accessible content in its comment.
In my previous post, I noted that lawyers foresaw a similar rule being promulgated under Title III of the ADA. However, with the recent announcement from the DOJ on revisiting the cost-effectiveness of the final rule under Title II of the ADA, a similar rule under Title III of the ADA is looking less likely. History may also shed light on what will happen in the future. In 2017, during the first term of President Donald Trump, his administration made the following regulatory processes on web accessibility “inactive” and then later withdrew them from the rulemaking process: 1) Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability, 2) Accessibility of Web Information and Services of Public Accommodations, 3) Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments and Places of Public Accommodation; Equipment and Furniture, and 4) Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability: Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government.
Librarians have been advocates for the accessibility of digital content and have been concerned about legislation affecting digital content long before the ADA Title II regulation was proposed and promulgated (Measuring the Accessibility of Public Library Home Pages by Erica B. Lilly & Connie Van Fleet, Accessibility and usability of online library databases by Ron Stewart, Vivek Narendra, & Alex Schmetzke, Web accessibility at academic libraries: standards, legislation, and enforcement by Michael Providenti & Robert Zai, and Tending a Wild Garden: Library Web Design for Persons with Disabilities by R. Todd Vandenbark are only a few examples of earlier literature on the topic). In light of recent developments in the law, librarians should continue their work and stay tuned.
