If you build, maintain, or audit websites for state or local government clients, the DOJ's June 2024 rule — 28 CFR Part 35, Subpart H — does not just affect your clients. It creates direct exposure for your firm. Here is exactly what the rule requires and what your contracts must now include.
Bashin v. Conduent — The Precedent That Changes Everything
Bashin v. Conduent State & Local Solutions, Inc. and US eDirect (California, 2023) — $2M settlement. The web developers misrepresented WCAG compliance in government contracts. The California False Claims Act's qui tam provision allowed a whistleblower to bring suit on behalf of the state. Settlement proceeds: $165K to the state, $87.5K to the plaintiff, remainder to attorneys. 29 states have comparable statutes. Federal enforcement posture is irrelevant to this risk — it is state law.
What 28 CFR § 35.200(a) Actually Says About Your Contracts
The operative language in 28 CFR § 35.200(a) appears twice — once for web content, once for mobile apps:
“A public entity shall ensure that web content that a public entity provides or makes available, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, [is] readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.”
That phrase — directly or through contractual arrangements — is the pass-through clause. The government agency cannot outsource its ADA obligation to you and then disclaim responsibility. The DOJ's own Small Entity Compliance Guide is explicit:
“If a state or local government uses a company to design, manage, or update its website, the content the company posts for the government would not fall under the [third-party] exception, and it would usually need to meet WCAG 2.1, Level AA.”
The third-party content exception in § 35.201(c) explicitly excludes contractors acting under a contractual arrangement. There is no escape hatch — not for you, not for your client.
Three Enforcement Actions — What They Mean for Your Business
Bashin v. Conduent — Nov 2023
California False Claims Act. $2M settlement against the web developer and its subcontractor. Misrepresentation of WCAG compliance in government contracts triggered qui tam whistleblower liability. 29 states have equivalent FCA provisions. This is the landmark case — developer liability, not agency liability.
Service Oklahoma Settlement — Jan 22, 2024 (DJ 204-49-130)
DOJ Tech Equity Initiative. Mobile app inaccessible to users with visual and motor disabilities. Settlement language requires any app the agency 'creates, administers, or maintains' to conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA — language that flows directly to any developer under contract. If you maintain a government mobile app, this applies to you.
Texas Counties Election Websites — Jun 14, 2024
DOJ settled with Colorado, Runnels, Smith, and Upton Counties (TX) over contractor-built election websites inaccessible to persons with visual or motor disabilities. The counties retained liability, but the websites were developer-built. This is the pattern: agency liability flows back to contractor performance.
What Your Government Contracts Must Now Include
The DOJ's First Steps guidance endorses four specific contract practices. As the contractor, you should expect these in any new government engagement — and you should proactively offer them:
01
WCAG 2.1 AA Warranty
A written statement in the contract that your deliverable conforms to WCAG 2.1 Level AA. This is not optional — the DOJ explicitly endorses warranty requirements and prohibition on disclaiming them.
02
Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR/VPAT)
Before final acceptance, you provide a completed ACR documenting WCAG 2.1 AA conformance for every deliverable. This is the federal model (GSA section508.gov) adapted to ADA Title II.
03
Pre-contract Accessibility Information
Agencies should require — and you should provide — detailed accessibility information before signing. Your VPAT from a prior government project is your strongest credential.
04
Indemnification for Accessibility Breaches
Government contracts increasingly include indemnification clauses for accessibility warranty breaches. Review your insurance coverage — E&O policies vary significantly on ADA/WCAG coverage.
The Most Common WCAG 2.1 AA Failures in Government-Contracted Websites
WebAIM's 2024 analysis found government sites average 20.3 accessibility errors per page. These are the failures most likely to trigger a complaint on a site you built:
SC 1.4.3
Insufficient color contrast 81% of pages
34.5 instances per page on average — most common by far
SC 1.1.1
Missing image alt text 54.5% of pages
Logos, seals, charts, icons — all need descriptive alt attributes
SC 1.3.1
Empty or missing form labels 48.6% of pages
Permit applications, contact forms, service request forms
SC 2.4.4
Non-descriptive link text 44.6% of pages
'Click here' and 'read more' fail this criterion
SC 4.1.2
Empty buttons (no accessible name) 28.2% of pages
Icon buttons with no aria-label
SC 2.4.7
No visible focus indicator Present after CSS resets
Common when designer removes default browser outline
What the Pending DOJ Interim Final Rule Means for Your FCA Exposure
On February 13, 2026, the DOJ submitted an Interim Final Rule to OIRA that could modify deadlines or technical standards. As of March 2026, no official delay has been announced — the April 24, 2026 deadline remains in force.
More importantly: your False Claims Act exposure does not depend on federal enforcement. The Bashin settlement was under California state law. The DOJ could pause all Title II web enforcement tomorrow and 29 state FCAs would still be fully operative. If your government contracts include WCAG compliance representations, those representations are independently actionable under state law — regardless of what happens at the federal level.
Audit Your Government Client's Site Before Your Next Contract Renewal
Know your WCAG 2.1 AA baseline before you sign a warranty. A documented audit on file is your strongest defense — and your strongest sales tool for new government contracts.
Run a Free Government Site Audit