QualityLogic logo, Click to navigate to Home
QualityLogic logo, Click to navigate to Home

Accessibility Industry Update: February 2025

Home » Blogs/Events » Accessibility Industry Update: February 2025

There’s a lot to cover in this update, so we’re going to jump right in. As always, let us know if you think we’ve missed something, or share the link with your colleagues or partners who may benefit from some or all of this information. You can also sign up to receive these accessibility updates via email.

Contents:

Accessibility Impact of the Initial Days in the Trump Administration

We’ll kick off this edition of the newsletter with a topic that has been on many people’s minds recently: the increased scrutiny that has been placed on DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and DEIA (DEI + accessibility) initiatives across the private and public sectors stemming from the 2024 presidential election.

You may have noticed this edition of the newsletter came a bit later than usual. The topic of accessibility and its future has been a matter of great discussion throughout the community. With the pace at which the landscape has been developing, we wanted to ensure that we could provide an accurate, unopinionated, and (to the best of our ability) factual account of events as they unfold.

Please note that the situation is a precarious one, and under active development. As such, we only guarantee the accuracy of this information as of the beginning of February 2025. It is very likely to change, so if you are reading later, it is best to do your own research and interpret the below as historical perspective. Furthermore, we are accessibility professionals, not lawyers, and most definitely not your lawyer.

Executive Orders

For our friends reading outside of the U.S., an executive order (EO) is an official document that the president can sign requiring that the government take certain actions or prioritize certain initiatives, with the goal of ensuring laws are being followed. Though the finer details of this process aren’t particularly relevant here, there are a few limitations to EOs. For instance, a president cannot violate the Constitution or override federal laws and statutes, and the Supreme Court may strike the EOs down if they are found to violate the constitution or have been issued without adequate authority.

It started on the president’s first day in office with an executive order titled Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing, which called for the termination of “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the federal government, under whatever name they appear.”

The following day Charles Ezell, the acting director of the Office of Personnel Management (which essentially acts as the federal government’s HR department), issued guidance that agencies need to follow to implement the order. Actions include but are not limited to:

By Wednesday, January 22, 2025 (5:00 PM EST):

  • Notify all employees about the closure of DEIA offices and ask them to report any efforts to disguise DEIA programs under different names or descriptions.
  • Place all DEIA office employees on paid administrative leave.
  • Remove DEIA-related websites, social media accounts, and public materials.

By Thursday, January 23, 2025 (12:00 PM EST), report to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) with:

  • A list of all DEIA offices and their employees (as of November 5, 2024).
  • A list of all DEIA-related contracts as of November 5, 2024.
  • A compliance plan for fully implementing these executive orders.

By Friday, January 31, 2025, submit to OPM:

  • A reduction-in-force plan for DEIA employees, in coordination with OPM.
  • A list of any contract or personnel descriptions that were altered since November 5, 2024, to obscure DEIA connections.

On the same Tuesday, while this was happening at OPM, another order was signed titled Ending Illegal Discrimination And Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity. This one focuses on eliminating race- and sex-based discrimination in both federal programs and private-sector practices, particularly those tied to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies. It asserts that such DEI policies that rely on race or sex for decision-making violate longstanding civil rights laws and undermine the merit-based opportunities intended by those laws. The order reads, “In case after tragic case, the American people have witnessed first-hand the disastrous consequences of illegal, pernicious discrimination that has prioritized how people were born instead of what they were capable of doing.”

Federal contracts must immediately cease promoting DEI, holding contractors and subcontractors responsible for affirmative action, and any form of preferential treatment on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin.

It continues by calling on private companies to ensure their policies comply with this interpretation of federal anti-discrimination laws. It also includes encouraging governmental bodies to move away from practices that provide preference on the basis of any of the above protected attributes. Those that fail to do so may face legal action. Within 120 days of the order’s signing, the U.S. Attorney General will have to submit a strategic enforcement plan to the president, containing:

  • Key sectors of concern within each agency’s jurisdiction
  • The most egregious and discriminatory DEI practitioners in each sector of concern
  • A plan of specific steps or measures to deter DEI programs or principles (whether specifically denominated “DEI” or otherwise) that constitute illegal discrimination or preferences. To carry out this objective, agencies have each been asked to identify up to nine “publicly traded corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with assets of 500 million dollars or more, State and local bar and medical associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments over 1 billion dollars” that could be involved in the provision of incentives that aren’t based on merit.
  • Other strategies to encourage the private sector to end illegal DEI discrimination and preferences and comply with all Federal civil-rights laws
  • Litigation that would be potentially appropriate for federal lawsuits, intervention, or statements of interest
  • Potential regulatory action and sub-regulatory guidance

The one other area of interest it’s important to talk about is Section 5, pertaining to institutions of higher education. Within 120 days of the order, or around the same time the report from the Attorney General is due, guidance will be issued to all “state and local agencies that receive federal funds”, including those that get federal grants or that participate in the federal student loan assistance program. This guidance is expected to contain responsibilities each institution has in holding with the Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College decision, which held that it is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution to consider race in the admissions process, unless:

  • There is a compelling interest, i.e., a desire for diversity among the student body
  • Race-based admissions must not result in stereotyping, and
  • The race-based programs must eventually come to an end.

Disappearance of Accessibility Pages on Federal Websites

Another thing to happen on day one of the new administration was the removal of some web pages that talk about accessibility, including the White House accessibility statement and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) directives on digital accessibility. The Spanish version of whitehouse.gov also appears to be no more. This is widely believed to have been a deliberate action in the attempt to comply with the executive order, though a White House spokesperson said this was instead due to a redesign, and the pages would be back soon, according to USAToday.

Private Sector Response

The reaction on the part of private sector organizations has been mixed. Some are resisting the federal shift, like Apple, Costco, Delta Airlines, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan, just to name a few.

Many other organizations are taking cues from the federal government and dismantling their DEIA policies. Some are choosing to do so quietly. For instance, Aldi’s, Amazon, and Meta reportedly sent out internal communications and removed reference to DEI policies from their website without public announcement.

What to Keep Watch On

Politics notwithstanding, the landscape of digital accessibility, both as an idea and as a practice, remains critical for organizations and businesses. But while some core principles hold steady, signs of change are emerging.  Here are facts to keep in mind during this uncertainty:

  • Accessibility benefits everyone, not necessarily just the 15% with a cognitive or physical impairment. To make a product accessible is to open the door to a larger customer base. The ROI of accessibility has been consistently documented and is undisputed. There are also great incentives to help you pay for accessibility.
  • To this point, usability requires accessibility, and accessibility contributes positively to SEO, conversion, retention, and many other metrics that together translate to sales.
  • There is still the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which remains enforceable for now.
  • While some argue that accessibility itself isn’t directly under attack, its connection to broader DEIA initiatives places it in the conversation. The Executive Orders do not primarily target accessibility, mentioning it only in relation to DEIA, but shifts in regulatory and legal landscapes could shape how it is prioritized.
  • States are increasingly enacting their own digital accessibility laws, and penalizing companies that fail to abide by them.
  • The European Accessibility Act goes into effect in June of this year, with impact to a significant number of U.S. based companies doing business there.
  • These executive orders have not come quietly. A joint lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the State of Maryland, and it likely will not be the last.

The question isn’t whether digital accessibility is still relevant—it is and always will be—it’s the extent to which it will be prioritized by organizations.

Accessibility Laws Incoming?

In the first legislative session of the year, New Mexico proposed HB0120, an act that would codify digital accessibility into law for the mobile applications and websites of state agencies. It closely reflects the implementation and objectives set out in last year’s DOJ Title II rule, with two major differences: an Office of Accessibility would be stood up to administer the formation of the act and each agency would be required to post an accessibility statement.

Headed northeast a bit, there is a proposition to amend Virginia’s Information Technology Access Act to create more stringent statewide procurement requirements (including the provision of Accessibility Conformance Reports), as well as factoring in more than just individuals experiencing blindness.

You can read more about these updates through the bills directly, or through the fantastic update put together by Converge Accessibility.

Conferences and Events

  • Axe-Con is free to attend and runs virtually from 2/25 to 2/27.
  • TechAccess OK is free to attend and runs both virtually and in-person at Oklahoma City, OK from 3/4 to 3/5.
  • CSUN will run 3/10 to 3/14 in Anaheim, CA.

We will be headed to all three. If you’re attending, it would be great to meet and say hello.

Resources and Things We’ve Been Reading

Interested in More Information?