In the United States, most digital accessibility lawsuits are filed in New York or California. That’s because those states have laws that make the legal landscape more favorable for web accessibility plaintiffs.
However, Minnesota’s Human Rights Act (MHRA) also enables plaintiffs to collect damages in certain situations. It’s similar to California’s Unruh Act, and recent court decisions have reinforced its applicability to lawsuits filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Any business or non-profit that operates in Minnesota could face lawsuits for acts of discrimination — and that could include websites, mobile apps, web-based documents, and other digital resources that aren’t accessible for folks with disabilities.
Below, we’ll explain how the MHRA applies to digital accessibility and provide tips for compliance.
The MHRA was introduced as the Minnesota State Act Against Discrimination in 1967. We’re not going to recount the full history of the law in this article, but there’s a fascinating piece on the Minnesota Historical Society’s website for those interested.
For businesses (and digital accessibility advocates), it’s important to know that the law was significantly amended in 1993. That amendment incorporated language from the ADA and extended non-discrimination protections to Minnesotans with disabilities.
And on May 15, 2024, Governor Tim Walz signed an extensive MHRA amendment into law that expanded the definition of protected classes.
The 2024 amendment to the MHRA extended the definition of disability to anyone who:
We’ll note here that this definition could potentially include individuals with conditions like long COVID, which has already been recognized as a disability under the ADA.
The amended version of the MHRA also allows for increased damages and penalties. As of Aug. 1, 2024, organizations that violate the law may face:
It’s important to note that any violation of the ADA could be considered a violation of the MHRA — as is the case with California’s Unruh Act. That includes digital accessibility violations.
Yes. Under the established interpretations of the MHRA, websites are considered places of public accommodation.
That was reinforced in early 2025. In Frost et al. v. Lion Brand Yarn Company, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota ruled that a website “is not meaningfully different from a physical ‘shopping center,’ and is functionally a ‘sales or rental establishment’ when it comes to the need for disabled persons to have equal access.”
Related: Minnesota Lawsuit Reinforces ADA’s Web Accessibility Requirements
Minnesota’s other digital accessibility regulations primarily apply to state offices. Those include:
For most Minnesota businesses, the MHRA and the ADA are the primary laws to consider when establishing a digital accessibility plan.
In the U.S., all businesses and non-profits have a legal responsibility to provide accessible content for consumers with disabilities — and they may face lawsuits in any state if they fail to meet that obligation.
The Minnesota Council on Disability recommends following WCAG, and given that WCAG has appeared in legal complaints filed in Minnesota, it’s a good idea to make WCAG conformance part of your strategy.
WCAG contains simple rules that you can use to test your content. Some common WCAG violations include:
You can fix all of these issues fairly easily and inexpensively. In fact, most accessibility improvements cost little or nothing to implement, and they can dramatically increase the reach of your digital products — while providing all users with a much better experience.
If you’re building a compliance strategy to meet Minnesota laws, the Bureau of Internet Accessibility can help. Find out whether your site meets WCAG standards with a free, confidential website accessibility analysis or contact us to connect with an expert.