axe-con 2026: Wildcard Track

The good old Wildcard Track, where legal landscape changes, entertaining talks, and other great topics that don't conform to the other tracks get bundled together. axe-con wouldn't be complete without them! Here are our thoughts on two days of wildcard talks.

The UX Digital Accessibility Legal Update

Speaker: Lainey Feingold, Disability Rights Lawyer, Author, Law Office of Lainey Feingold

Summary/Insights: Ashley Helminiak

I always get a lot out of Lainey's yearly legal update talk. She has so much passion and empathy for people, and it shines through when she speaks. I think I'll be buying the book she helped to author, Digital Accessibility Ethics, when it comes later this spring. She used her favorite cookie analogy to remind us that accessibility needs to be baked into our laws and culture, and is enforced. There are already many components in both laws (ADA, etc.), and enforcers (people with disabilities, private party lawsuits, etc.).

This year's accessibility related legal updates include:

• ADA web + mobile rule: State and local government digital entities need to comply with WCAG 2.1 AA
  • April 24, 2026: deadline for larger organizations to comply
  • April 24, 2027: deadline for all applicable organizations to comply
  • This rule was just sent to the OIRA (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs), so it's possible the rule might change in the future or be pushed back.
• Even if this rule gets changed, the ADA still applies to state and local government websites and mobile apps.
  • February 2026: Class action voting case in Textas for accessible mail-in ballots (also Alabama, Wisconsin)
  • Lawsuit against University of West Virginia
  • Blind juror case in New York
  • Luisiana web case, judge rejected effort to throw case out of court due to deadline not being past yet.
• Healthcare improvements
  • May 11, new accessibility rules for medical providers receiving federal funds for web, mobile, and kiosk touchpoints
  • A Talking Prescription Label lawsuit in Ohio
• Healthcare concerns
  • Digital accessibility provisions could be collateral damage
  • Anti-trans/anti-integration mandate
  • HHS Rule under attack by 9 republican states, challenging Section 504
• The ADA still protects people with disabilities
  • Even if there isn't a more specific rule or regulation, the ADA still protects rights of people with disabilities in public spaces.
• Department of Education enforcement ability has declined
  • Huge layoffs, rehires, and job turnover have decimated the enforcement efforts of the Dept. of Education, resulting in a severe drop off in the number of cases resolved.
  • Private enforcement is the driver behind these cases in recent months
• Proposed federal laws
  • Website & Software Apps: Would cover commercial providers who design, develop and modify websites or applications to certain covered entities.
  • CTVA: Updates to communications, video programming, and emergency services
  • Medical Device Nonvisual Accessibility Act of 2025
• Proposed backlash bills
  • Federal effort: ADA 30 Days to Comply Act, ADA reform to boost access and protect small businesses
  • State efforts:
    • Missouri: Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation, passed unanimously on February 6, 2026
    • Utah: introduced January 2, 2026
• Font Flip Flop

Lainey also went over some global legislation, including the European Accessibility Act, Rights for Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, Canada Accessible + . States also have their own laws, and many have accessibility legislation around procurement, transportation, prescriptions, etc. These are also a form of resistance against what's happening on a federal level.

As always, don't use overlays! This is not legal advice. But with over a third of accessibility lawsuits last year against companies using overlays, not to mention cases against overlay giants Accessibe and Userway, it's good advice nonetheless.

Overall, we are in a time of turbulence and uncertainty regarding the government and legislation, not to mention government-level enforcement. But there is power in resistance to the overturning or changing of rules that protect people with disabilities. In Lainey's words, "The rules are the rules until they aren't."

European Accessibility Act (EAA) Compliance Update

Speakers:
Matthew Luken, SVP & Chief Architect, Deque Systems
Otto Sleeking, Partner, Taylor Wessing
Moïse Akbaraly, Co-founder, IPEDIS

Summary/Insights: Ashley Helminiak

This talk dove right in, and had good coverage regardless of level of awareness of the EAA. There has been an increase of demands and complaints around compliance of European-based companies for the ADA Title II in the US, so global pressure goes both ways. Many countries in the EU have enforcement measures such as daily fines, etc. They're also responding to consumer complaints, doing larger-scale audits, and asking for companies to self-report their issues. Germany has rejected accessibility overlays as a valid solution for EAA compliance as well, so anyone doing eCommerce or other business there cannot look to an overlay to protect themselves. The EN 301 549 is going to version 4 this spring as well, which will likely look to WCAG 2.2 AA as the core level of compliance. They even seem to be making note of an organization's willingness to fix issues and bring their websites under compliance, with some French litigation going to the court, noting indifference of a company's concern for the accessibility barriers. It is a benchmark case, since it's the first case against a private company under the EAA, and the other countries are watching to see how the case resolves. It will set a precedent in France, and likely in other countries within the EU, for how to handle cases against private entities.

The French case against four grocer companies has created a lot of noise on both sides of the case. The groups going after this particular sector are looking at banks and financial institutions next. Governments, on the other hand, are focusing on received complaints to determine where to prioritize, which would potentially differ by country. However, I did appreciate their statement that the spirit of the EAA isn't to collect penalties and punish right off the bat. They want to work together to resolve issues, and only penalize if there is continued failure to make progress and fix issues. Even the private suits are seeking relief instead of damages, which means they want the issue fixed instead of money.

Overall this talk was a useful in revealing the temperature of accessibility proceedings happening within the EU, and I for one appreciate the efforts to protect people with disabilities, but also the mindset of prioritizing true compliance over immediate penalties and damages. After all, the goal is to make the web a more inclusive and accessible place, isn't it?

Inclusive, Engaging Accessibility Presentations (Ditch the Dull!)

Speaker: Kai Wong, Principal, Digital Accessibility, Teladoc Health

Summary/Insights: Megan James

While you might expect something big and flashy from the name, Kai delivered in a more personal, conversational style that included humorous elements and interaction with the chat. I thoroughly enjoyed this talk!

She shared how one person can spark ripple effects, and that teaching accessibility to even a small audience can influence entire teams and create lasting change. Their own journey started as a neurodivergent student, where engaging teaching changed their perspective and inspired momentum.

When teaching about accessibility, she shared a personal framework called “Keeping it Real”:

• R – Relevant: Start where your audience is. Use examples that resonate with their role and everyday work.
• E – Easy: Reduce cognitive load, simplify slides, use plain language, and respect attention spans.
• A – Actionable: Show impact, give concrete tips, and invite small, practical steps (don’t rely on expertise alone).
• L – Light: Use stories, humor, and pacing to respect emotional load. Avoid judgment and ableist language, creating a safe space for learning.

I also liked the emphasis on “boring can be a barrier” and how making content easy to digest makes it more retainable. With more retainability comes further action and inspiration.

She highlighted some other key points as well, touching on the power of the way you frame content to engage people and how it matters just as much as what you’re covering. Overall this was a great reminder for any presentation to try and keep it light and connect with the audience emotionally, we’re all human after all!

From Compliance to Competence: How Certification Drives Repeatable, Enterprise-level Accessibility

Speakers:
Cintia Romero, Sr. Staff Designer, Adobe
Damian Sian, Principal Engineering Program Manager—Accessibility, Adobe

Summary/Insights: Riley Rittenhouse

Treating accessibility like a checkbox can arrive from good intentions but ultimately treats accessibility as a last step or emergency patch at the end of a project.

Compliance vs Competence

They expressed the importance of not just fixing issues but identifying WCAG patterns and reducing rework and late stage fixes. Gaining accessibility certification isn’t a requirement, but does provide the vocabulary and resources for talking about accessibility and finding ways to improve experiences.

Certification is an investment in the quality of your work.

At Adobe they created the Design Accessibility Certified Expert (DACE) training that bridges the gap between design education and IAAP aligned standards build specifically for the design lifecycle. They mentioned that a basic design education rarely includes accessibility, and from my own experience I can say that this is true. Until working at RDG I had almost no exposure to accessibility or the importance of it in design.

The idea behind the this course is to inform the next generation of designers to implement accessibility from the start. This is something I wish I would have had in college and I’m interested to see what else it covers.

The Myth of Neutral Design: How Accessibility Gets Lost in Objective Systems

Speaker: Angela Young, Advisor, Digital Solutions Consulting - Accessibility Training & Awareness, Epsilon

Summary/Insights: Ashley Helminiak

Angela introduced neutral design is the belief that design can be "objective" and value-free. However, it can used as a weapon against accessibility, such as labeling it as a means to address "edge cases." Some pitfalls of neutral design include:

• one user experience used as the baseline
• Users that have issues are treated as "edge cases" and blamed for having problems with the product
• It can cause rework to address issues discovered too late

I really liked her phrase, "variance builds resilience," because it really does encompass the idea that if we create something that works for a wide variety of people instead of "the masses" masquerading as a baseline default user, the product is stronger. I also liked her example of the hidden "default user," which makes many default assumptions that often don't get contradicted in any user personas. Assumptions may include internet access, ability to process information, read small text, etc. She even brought up that if your metrics don't include disabled users, then any success you have is fake since it's not based on your real, diverse user base.

She then went into examples of neutral design that aren't actually neutral:

• Inputs that don't describe how to fill out the field. The error messages may be helpful, but you shouldn't arrive at an obvious error that could have been prevented by a better form label or description (ex. minimum character requirement for a name or password).
• Time limits that can't be updated. Some people take longer to fill out forms or get distracted by something in the middle of filling one out, and should be able to extend their time as needed.
• Tiny targets. Small tappable or clickable targets and cramped designs make it difficult for a variety of users to accurately interact.
• Inconsistent help locations. Don't make users hunt around for help. No matter where they are, it should be in a universal place.
• Redundant entry is extra cognitive load. Confirmation fields or repetitive information collection increases decision making and chance of errors.
• Overlays covering up focused elements. Elements that cover up the experience can disrupt the order and obscure where you actually are in the page flow. Not to mention they're annoying to most people.
• Algorithms with narrow definitions of success. Systems can learn that there is a "default user," which can cause issues of validation or suspicion for people who fall outside of those parameters.

Her methodology for addressing these issues are to turn disability into a method instead of an edge case. Disabled users are perfect stress tests for systems, and can reveal where a design is brittle. I, as a poker of holes myself, see definite value in this. We should also keep in mind that access is shaped by more than disability, and benefits to those so-called "edge cases" have widespread positive impact.

She then showed an accessibility innovation model in a pyramid shape, with accessibility at the foundation. The next level up is usability, followed by design and innovation. Basically, we go from "can I accomplish this with the tools and body I have?" to "can I accomplish this smoothly?" to "is it readable and predictable?" to "is this delightful?" I've seen similar models before, but it resonates every time. Accessibility isn't the cherry on top. It's the foundation on which everything should be built.

This was honestly my favorite talk of the first day. Definitely recommend!

Is Something Fundamental Still Missing From the Accessibility Ecosystem?

Speaker: Matt King, Accessibility Technical Program Manager, Meta

Summary/Insights: Haley Troyer

Remember the days of developing for Internet Explorer? It seems like a lifetime ago, now, but for users of assistive technology, the issue of cross-software interoperability still persists. Considering the huge advancements in accessibility over the last few years, this is definitely a glaring, fundamental issue. Why is there still no standardization across assistive technology? Why do users of AT still need to rely on workarounds and switching between multiple apps just to get by? In this insightful talk, Matt King, a screen reader user himself, asks these questions and discusses his hope for the future of assistive technology interoperability.

Much like how browsers collaborated to conform to standards which (now) ensure a consistent and predictable experience between browsers, assistive technology needs to do the same. In response to this need, Matt and his team started the ARIA-AT Community Group, which aims to create these standards for assistive technology software. His hope is that users of AT will eventually have a consistent experience of digital products, no matter which software they use to access them. A worthy goal, for sure!

The group has already made incredible progress, with over 1,100 tests written covering 7,500+ commands, 7,000+ verdicts measuring 38 semantics. They are currently looking for more passionate individuals to help with the cause. Interested? Check out the ARIA-AT Project website to learn more.

As someone who doesn’t use AT for everyday tasks, this was an incredibly informative and eye-opening talk to kick off the second day of axe-con 2026! 

The Gaps We Inherit

Speaker: Lola Odelola, W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG), Co-Chair

Summary/Insights: Megan James

Lola helped fill in gaps by exposing them with accessibility interoperability issues on the web, primarily for blind users. She explained that while many often think in terms of HTML and CSS, what really matters for screen readers is the accessibility tree, a structure derived from the DOM that conveys the semantic information (roles, names, text) necessary for assistive technologies. Unlike the DOM and render tree, which handle structure and visual layout, the accessibility tree communicates content in a meaningful way to screen readers and other assistive technologies.

Understanding how different browsers, operating systems, and screen readers interpret content via platform accessibility APIs helps create better awareness. Standards like HTML-AAM, Core-AAM, and SVG-AAM define how semantic info should be exposed, but differences across platforms can create inconsistencies. Even with tools like CanIUse, a11ysupport.io, and PowerMapper to check support, issues can remain.

She emphasized that these gaps are both political and structural, with unequal awareness, power, and attention of what gets prioritized. True accessibility means putting user needs first, and recognizing that many current systems are designed around sighted users. Closing these gaps requires intentional design, standardized practices, and a mindset that considers the lived experiences.

Building Accessible Enterprise Applications: A Developer's Playbook

Speaker: Jeremy Rivera, Developer Advocate, Deque Systems, Inc.

Summary/Insights: Haley Troyer

Accessibility is challenging in enterprise environments. This isn’t because designers and developers don’t know about accessibility, but because of the systems in place that prevent them from doing the good work. In this talk, Jeremy shares his playbook for integrating accessibility into large-scale teams.

Code-level habits

Small habits can save a lot of time and bug-fixing headaches later on in the development workflow. Some of these include:

• Tabbing through the UI and testing with a screen reader before committing code
• Verifying every interactive element has an accessible name
• Using native elements before custom ones
• Triggering actions using the keyboard

Component-level strategy

When designing components within a system, it’s important to include accessibility annotations in every handoff. Every shared component must define:

• Keyboard behavior
• Focus state changes
• Accessible name source
• Error state behavior

Team habits

Rather than having one person or team doing all the accessibility work, spread the work across roles.

• Design: Include focus movement notes, Define control names, specify error behavior
• Dev: validate interaction while coding, use component APIs correctly, avoid custom controls without contracts
• QA: test keyboard, verify announcements, check dynamic updates

These tips are helpful for small teams, like Rapid Development Group, as well as enterprise teams. Baking accessibility into every stage of our work, rather than treating it as its own separate phase, is key!

ADA Title II: Panel Discussion

Speakers:
Alisa Shtromberg, Director of Digital Accessibility, Houston City College
Emilie Berglund, Director of Accessibility, McGraw Hill
Kyle Shachmut, Sr Director, Digital Accessibility, Harvard University

Summary/Insights: Megan James

This panel brought together leaders from higher education and industry to share how they’re preparing for compliance and scaling their programs. What stood out was the honestly in the conversation, and how accessibility work is a team effort. They reflected on experiences of their own organizational reactions often mirroring the “five stages of grief” when facing a new front.

Q: How are you preparing for ADA Title II?

The panelists agreed that preparation starts with leadership buy-in and clear expectations. At Houston Community College, the approach included building a priority matrix to assess legal risk, audience size, and exposure. With so much to remediate, prioritization and auditing is critical. Something mentioned from another panelist, Emilie, was the spotlight on proactive vs. retroactive work being done. This includes fixing and updating current materials for compliance, but also assessing what to build new from the ground up.

Q: How are you using tools to meet compliance goals?

It was nice to see how different organizations utilize different tools, dependent on budget, type, or size. They relayed free resources such as NVDA or WAVE for getting started, while others implemented accessible component libraries across teams to reduce errors and enhance consistency.

Q: How do you advocate to your organization?

The biggest advice here? Leading with empathy. Many are at different points in their accessibility journey, especially in organizations that operate with multiple roles across sectors. Another key piece included the panelists tying accessibility back to the mission. When this aligns with institutional values (whether education, equity, or service) it becomes less about compliance and more about purpose. This helps to drive the change and create steady progress.

If AI is the key to the Future, are Disabled People Locked out?

Speakers:
Carmel Heydarian, Research Fellow, American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
Alyssa Shock, Research Fellow, American Foundation for the Blind
Arielle Silverman, Director of Research, American Foundation for the Blind

Summary/Insights: Riley Rittenhouse

AI development has the potential to support accessibility, but can also create risks of discrimination. They conducted studies that explored use of AI in transit, education, employment, image descriptions and privacy concerns. 

In education over 60% of people reported using AI in their course. Uses include summarizing text and understanding materials, grammar, citations, and making learning more accessible. This could be converting materials into a format for blind or deaf learners.

During automated interviews and tests users were required to disable accessibility setting on their device. They also reported tests were inaccessible to screen readers and not enough time wasn’t allowed. Applicants also stated that they were often unaware AI was even being used for these job applications.

80% of blind people were relying on AI for image descriptions. Someone reported using Copilot to help with their taxes and it reported information incorrectly that could lead to serious tax fraud issues. Respondents also stated that they would feel more comfortable using AI as long as their data was not saved and sent to tech companies.

There were a lot of numbers and statistics being thrown out, but overall I thought this study was really interesting. It seems people with disabilities like the use of AI for things like note taking, but we should be aware of some the the traps or assumptions that AI makes. People shouldn’t have to give up their privacy in order to benefit from independence that AI can provide. Just further proves that more testing needs to be done to make AI accessible for all.

Never Judge a PDF by Its Cover Layer

Speaker: Destin Hubble, Accessibility Analyst, Indiana University UITS, ATAC

Summary/Insights: Ashley Helminiak

This talk was interesting to me because it was a break from the accessibility of websites to focus on digital PDFs. Released in 1993, PDFs were designed to be universally openable and forward compatible so they can be opened no matter how old they are, which, in an age with slow internet and far less continuity than exists today, sounds rather grand. they even released their specifications and released the PDF reader for free. With widespread adoption, even by the IRS/government, the standard was handed over to the ISO in 2008. Destin went over alternatives to PDFs, and brought up the pitfalls of using PDFs (they're not more secure!), before going into the accessibility of the document that was invented to be a digital version of paper.

In short, there are many issues, the worst of which being if a PDF is just a scan of a page. There is zero accessibility out of the box in those cases, and we would be relying on high quality PDF readers to interpret the text, with limited success. When possible, sharing links to original HTML sources or documents (such as a Google or Word doc) are better than sharing a PDF.

However, if we have to use PDFs, there are tools we can use to check and remediate accessibility. Some simple tools we can use is to try to 'select all' in the document to see if there are text layers, as well as copy/paste the content into Word or Pages to see if the flow and hierarchy remains the same. Destin then discussed some traits that remediation tools have and should have:

Ideal PDF Remediation Tool:

• Would be a portal for both remediators and users
• Administration and group controls
• Would have progress tracking
• Would have searching, tagging, filtering, and hiding features
• It would have a track record in bug fixes and feature requests
• would have extensive and up-to-date help documentation
• Could use AI for initial framework
• Options for directing AI with formatting preferences
• Can edit the underlying text the AI produces
• Will not trust the incoming text layer

Current PDF Remediation Tools:

• Heavily rely on AI
• Desined for mass upload/download
• Limited editing capability
• Can't do all the remediation

He then led us on an exercise of identifying structural elements in various PDF documents, which makes you think...why not just make it an HTML document in the first place? In the end, we mostly know the answers to that question as it sits today. Creating PDFs doesn't require knowledge of code or even any particular skillset. They empower users to apply branding and layouts that they might not be able to in an HTML document, at least not without external assistance. The learning curve is low to be able to output a PDF. But it's not nearly as low when you consider the accessibility of the PDFs you create.

In the end, HTML is king, but even some other alternatives are better than PDFs. Destin encouraged function over form, which I definitely agree with. We can do a lot of things to create beautiful web pages these days, that also have a friendly UI and good print styles. I think that as we continue to grow in this area, people will be better able to let go of the PDF.

Read our insights from the other tracks:

• Keynotes
• Development Track
• Design Track
• Organizational Success with Accessibility Track