RE: Legal Precedent Set for Web Accessibility

Cynthia -- thanks so much for this.  I have one question, below.

***********
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
tobias@inclusive.com
+732.441.0831 v/tty
www.inclusive.com
 
> 1.  In Footnote 2, the Court suggests that the legislative 
> history of the ADA is inconclusive on the issue of regulating 
> private websites.  As a result, the Court declines to draw an 
> inference since there is an absence of congressional action.  
> Target argued that although Congress amended the 
> Rehabilitation Act to require federal government websites to 
> be accessible, Congress has not amended the ADA.

Here's my non-lawyerly understanding:

The 1998 version of Congress's 508 language is different from previous
versions, but not with respect to requiring websites to be accessible.  The
differences have to do with the process of establishing standards, having
DoJ do reports, etc.  All the language about the accessibility of federal
E&IT was in the previous versions.  It may be that the definition of E&IT
changed at some point in an update of Clinger-Cohen.

Is that correct?  If so, was Target's argument addressed in court?

Received on Saturday, 9 September 2006 18:04:16 UTC