## Facts

- Access Now, Inc., a disability-rights organization, and Robert Gumson, a blind individual using screen-reader software, sued Southwest Airlines Co.
- Southwest operated southwest.com, which allowed users to check fares and schedules and purchase travel-related services, including reservations.
- Plaintiffs alleged the website’s design features made it difficult or impossible for blind users relying on screen readers to access core functions.
- Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), alleging exclusion from Southwest’s “virtual ticket counter.”
- Southwest moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing that a website is not a “place of public accommodation” under Title III.

## Issues

1. Whether a commercial website, standing alone, qualifies as a “place of public accommodation” under Title III of the ADA.
2. Whether Title III can apply to an inaccessible website based on a sufficient nexus between the website and a physical place of public accommodation.
3. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged discrimination actionable under Title III given the statute’s focus on access to places of public accommodation.

## Decision

- The district court granted Southwest’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion and dismissed the complaint.
- The court held that Title III regulates access to physical, concrete places of public accommodation, not stand-alone websites.
- The court rejected the characterization of the website as a “virtual ticket counter” within Title III’s scope.
- The court further found the complaint did not allege a sufficient connection showing that inaccessibility of the website denied access to a specific physical place of public accommodation.
- On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds and did not reach the merits of Title III’s application to the website.

## Legal Principles

- Title III’s “place of public accommodation” concept is tied to tangible, physical locations identified in the statute’s enumerated categories.
- A website, as a virtual construct, is not itself a “place of public accommodation” for Title III purposes under the physical-place interpretation.
- A Title III claim involving an intangible service may require allegations showing the inaccessibility impedes access to, or enjoyment of, a specific physical place of public accommodation (a nexus theory).
- Courts should not expand statutory coverage to new domains by redefinition where doing so would effectively create rights and standards not set by the legislature or authorized rulemaking.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed the Title III ADA claims because the alleged inaccessibility of southwest.com concerned a virtual platform rather than a physical place of public accommodation, and the complaint did not plead a concrete denial of access to a specific physical facility through a sufficient nexus.


Access Now, Inc. v. Sw. Airlines Co., 227 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (S.D. Fla. 2002)