In reply to Christopher Price.

The Supreme Court didn't rule on anything. It declined to take the case.

The Supreme Court isn't just an appeals court. Its role is to rule on important matters of constitutional law, to settle differences in approaches taken by the appeals courts below it, and to clarify its own previous judgments. This case fell into none of those categories, and so the Court was right to refuse to hear it.

So the Court was far from "cowardly". Indeed, even if it had heard the case, there is no way that it would have ruled that the DoJ should issue regulations. The ADA gives the DoJ the power to do so; it doesn't put the DoJ under any kind of obligation.

In any event, the DoJ doesn't need to issue any regulations in order for those responsible for websites to know what to do. The ADA requires that "reasonable accommodations" be taken. And where there is no specific ruling on what constitutes reasonableness, the courts will just go with what is accepted as such by those in the field. So the WCAG guidelines tell you all you need to know.

By contrast, no-one in the field — apart from you, apparently — thinks it's reasonable to say "I don't know what to do, so I haven't done anything". So (unless you've complied by lucky accident) your sites will not comply with the ADA and you can look forward to being the recipient of future lawsuits.