A Triumph for Liberty and Law: How Missouri is Protecting Small Businesses from Predatory Litigation

In an era where partisan division often paralyzes governance, the unanimous passage of Missouri’s Senate Bill 907 stands as a powerful testament to what can be achieved when legislators unite to defend the fundamental principles of justice and economic freedom. This landmark legislation, now awaiting the governor’s signature, directly confronts a growing national scourge: the weaponization of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) through predatory lawsuits targeting small businesses over minor website accessibility issues. By granting entities a 90-day right to cure alleged violations before a lawsuit can be filed, Missouri has drawn a critical line in the sand. It affirms that the purpose of civil rights law is to foster inclusion and accessibility, not to serve as a tool for legal extortion that undermines the very enterprises that form the backbone of our communities and our economy.

The Facts: A Crisis of Litigation, Not Accessibility

The core facts of this issue are alarming and clearly laid out by the legislative process. According to a 2025 ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuits Report cited in the debate, more than 100 businesses in Missouri alone have been targets of lawsuits alleging violations such as incompatibility with screen-reader software, insufficient color contrast, or missing captions for audio content. While ensuring digital accessibility for individuals with disabilities is an undeniable moral and legal imperative, the pattern of litigation reveals a system being gamed. Legislators rightly condemned many of these suits as “cash grabs” rather than good-faith efforts to improve accessibility.

The national picture, highlighted by U.S. Rep. Sam Graves (R-Tarkio), is even starker. In a letter to constituents, Graves noted that website-related ADA lawsuits have exploded from approximately 200 in 2016 to more than 4,000 in 2025. Most disturbingly, he reported that over half of these 4,000 cases were filed by just 33 individuals. This data points unmistakably to a predatory, industrial-scale litigation model, where a small group of plaintiffs and their attorneys systematically file suits seeking quick settlements from businesses that cannot afford a prolonged legal defense. The target is not systemic change but financial payoff, exploiting the laudable goals of the ADA for personal gain.

The Legislative Response: SB 907 and Its Provisions

Introduced by State Senator Brad Hudson (R-Cape Fair), Senate Bill 907, dubbed the Act Against Abusive Website and Web Content Litigation, was crafted as a direct remedy. Its central mechanism is straightforward and fair: upon receiving a notice of alleged noncompliance, a business, church, or nonprofit has 90 days to make the necessary corrections to its website or web content. Only if the entity fails to act within that grace period can a lawsuit proceed. This “right to cure” is a cornerstone of equitable jurisprudence, aligning with principles of due process and fundamental fairness.

The bill’s journey through the legislature is a story of broadening consensus and thoughtful refinement. After receiving unanimous initial approval in the Senate, the bill moved to the House. The House General Laws Committee wisely extended the protections to all entities registered with the Missouri Secretary of State, explicitly including churches and nonprofit organizations alongside for-profit businesses. This was a crucial expansion, recognizing that the threat of predatory lawsuits imperils the mission-driven work of community institutions that are often operating on shoestring budgets.

Furthermore, during floor debate, the House adopted an amendment to protect “web content” in addition to standalone websites. This provision is especially vital for the modern digital economy, as it covers small business owners who use third-party platforms like Etsy to host their storefronts. These entrepreneurs often have no technical control over the underlying website infrastructure to ensure ADA compliance, making them uniquely vulnerable to lawsuits over issues they cannot fix. The final, amended bill received unanimous approval in both the House and the Senate—a rare and powerful display of bipartisan agreement on a matter of urgent economic justice.

Opinion: Defending the Rule of Law in the Digital Marketplace

The unanimous passage of SB 907 is not merely a policy win; it is a profound victory for the principles of ordered liberty, the rule of law, and the sanctity of American small enterprise. From a perspective deeply committed to constitutional governance and human flourishing, this legislation represents the correct and necessary balance between noble civil rights objectives and the protection against legal abuse.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is one of the great civil rights achievements of our time, a law born from the best of our national character to ensure dignity, access, and participation for all. Its application to the digital realm is a logical and essential evolution. However, when the enforcement mechanism of such a law is hijacked by bad actors seeking profit rather than progress, it corrupts the law’s intent and erodes public trust. A legal system that allows a handful of individuals to systematically file thousands of lawsuits—not to create accessible spaces, but to extract settlements—is a system that has lost its way. It transforms the courthouse from a temple of justice into a tool of intimidation.

This predatory model is a direct assault on economic liberty. Small businesses and community nonprofits are the lifeblood of our towns and cities. They represent the aspirations of individuals and families who have invested their savings, their labor, and their dreams into creating something of value. To subject these entities to legal ambush over technical website flaws—often without warning or opportunity to correct—is unconscionable. It prioritizes punitive action over cooperative resolution, fear over partnership. The financial and emotional toll of such lawsuits can be devastating, forcing closures and stifing the entrepreneurial spirit that drives our economy.

Missouri’s 90-day cure period restores sanity and justice to this process. It aligns perfectly with the foundational legal principle that the objective of the law should be compliance and remedy, not punishment and profit. It recognizes that most business owners want to do the right thing but may lack the immediate technical expertise or resources to identify and fix every potential accessibility issue on their websites. Giving them a reasonable opportunity to comply honors their good faith and directs energy toward the shared goal of greater accessibility, rather than draining resources into legal defense funds.

Furthermore, the inclusion of churches and nonprofits is a critical acknowledgment of our nation’s pluralistic fabric. These institutions provide irreplaceable social, spiritual, and charitable services. Threatening them with financially crippling lawsuits over web accessibility, before even giving them a chance to adapt, is antithetical to a free society that values civic association and community support. The law wisely protects this vital sector of civil society.

The bipartisan, unanimous nature of this bill’s passage cannot be overstated. In our hyper-polarized climate, it demonstrates that the defense of small businesses and the rule of law against clear abuse can and must transcend party lines. Senator Brad Hudson called it an “all hands on deck effort,” and rightly so. When legislators from across the political spectrum see the same threat to their constituents’ livelihoods, they can find common ground. This is how representative democracy is supposed to work—identifying a genuine problem and crafting a practical, principled solution.

U.S. Rep. Sam Graves’s parallel efforts at the federal level, through the Protecting Small Businesses from Predatory Website Lawsuits Act, highlight that Missouri is addressing a national crisis. Missouri’s law should serve as a model for other states and for Congress. The data is clear: the explosion of lawsuits is driven by a litigation industry, not a grassroots movement for accessibility. Federal action is needed to create a consistent national standard and a uniform right-to-cure period, preventing a patchwork of state laws and closing loopholes that predatory litigants might exploit.

In conclusion, the passage of SB 907 is a powerful reaffirmation of core American values. It upholds the true intent of the ADA by promoting actual accessibility improvements through cooperation. It defends the rule of law by curtailing its abuse for financial gain. And most importantly, it protects the economic liberty and dignity of small business owners, nonprofit leaders, and community pillars who ask only for a fair chance to succeed and serve. This is not a retreat from disability rights; it is an advance toward a more just, equitable, and principled system where the law is a shield for the vulnerable, not a weapon for the exploitative. Missouri has taken a brave and necessary stand for freedom, and the nation should take note.