Two states matter more than the rest for a website that sells nationally. California's Unruh Civil Rights Act attaches statutory damages to an ADA violation, which is why so much of this litigation is filed there. Colorado's HB21-1110 set an accessibility standard for state and local government sites with dates attached, which reaches suppliers through contracts. If you sell to customers in either state, and online you do, both are worth understanding. This is not legal advice; it is what to raise with your lawyer.
Why California draws the filings
The Unruh Act treats an ADA violation as a violation of state civil rights law and attaches statutory damages per occurrence. That arithmetic, rather than anything technical about California websites, is why a business anywhere in the country receives a California letter. The defence is the same everywhere: a site that meets Level AA and a statement that shows the programme.
What Colorado's rule adds
HB21-1110 sets a technical standard for state and local government websites in Colorado with compliance dates, and public bodies pass that duty down in procurement. A supplier selling software or services to a Colorado agency will be asked for a conformance report, which is the same artefact a federal 508 bid asks for.
What a nationally-sold site should do
Aim at WCAG Level AA once, publish one statement, and keep the evidence. State-by-state compliance is not a strategy for a website that anyone can reach; the standard is the same and the difference between states is only who can sue you and for how much.
Questions people ask about ada website compliance california
Do we need a separate California statement?
No. One statement covering the site, honestly dated, is what to publish.
Does incorporation state matter?
Far less than where your customers are. Online, that is everywhere.
Is this legal advice?
No. Take the letter and these statutes to a lawyer who practises in the relevant state.