Missouri 2026 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 907 — Establishes the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation" which establishes provisions relating to litigation alleging certain disability access violations

Last action — Letter of approval from the Governor

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed House
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 01, 2025. Enacted.

Signed by Governor Mike Kehoe (Republican) on May 06, 2026.

Odds of enactment

High chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Advancing 50% · moderate confidence

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

Summary

HCS/SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website or web content access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website or web content access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination. A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website or web content access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website or web content access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition. Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith. The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website or web content access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions. The court may award attorney's fees and costs to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court. If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website or web content accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office, and the state and any political subdivision thereof. This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date. This act is similar to SB 1471 (2026), HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), and HCS/HBs 1842 & 2150 (2026). KATIE O'BRIEN

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

127 added · 116 removed

Plain-language change summary

The recent amendment to SB 907 introduces a new section aimed at addressing what is termed "abusive website or web content access litigation." This change adds specific terminology related to accessibility violations and expands the definition of who is considered a resident of Missouri in this context. Notably, the term "web content access" was added to clarify the target of the law. These modifications are significant as they aim to protect individuals and entities from potentially frivolous lawsuits regarding website accessibility, ensuring that legitimate claims are prioritized while discouraging abuse of the legal system.

→
Previous
Latest
SECOND REGULAR SESSION [PERFECTED] SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILLS NOS.
SECOND REGULAR SESSION [TRULYAGREED TOAND FINALLY PASSED] HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILLS NOS.
907, 1154 & 103RD GENERALASSEMBLY INTRODUCED BY SENATOR HUDSON.
907, & 1272 103RD GENERALASSEMBLY 5627H.09T ANACT To amend chapter 537, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to abusive website or web content access litigation.
5627S.07P KRISTINAMARTIN, Secretary ANACT To amend chapter 537, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to abusive website access litigation.
(1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation".
(1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation".
(a) "Access violation", any allegation that a website fails to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act or under state law;
(a) "Access violation", any allegation that a website or web content fails to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act or under state law;
any entity that has registered with the Missouri secretary of state's office under chapter 351;
any entity that has registered with the Missouri secretary of state's office;
or the state of Missouri or any political subdivision thereof, including all boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, SS SCS SBs 907, 2 & 1272 authorities, and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or in accordance with state law or regulations.
or the state of Missouri or any political subdivision thereof, including all HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 2 & 1272 boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or in accordance with state law or regulations.
(1) The attorney general under section 507.070 on behalf of a class of residents of this state who are subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state who is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction within this state against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation.
(1) The attorney general under section 507.070 on behalf of a class of residents of this state who are subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, or any resident of this state who is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, may file a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction within this state against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website or web content access violation is abusive litigation.
(2) In determining whether any litigation that alleges any website access violation constitutes abusive litigation, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to determine if the litigation was filed in good faith.
(2) In determining whether any litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation constitutes abusive litigation, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to determine if the primary purpose of the litigation that alleges a website or web content access violation is obtaining a payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court.
(c) Any history of sanctions or findings of bad faith against the plaintiff or counsel;
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 3 & 1272 (c) Any history of sanctions or findings of bad faith against the plaintiff or counsel;
The application of such settlement information shall be used SS SCS SBs 907, 3 & 1272 only as provided by this section and shall not otherwise alter the rules of evidence applicable to such court;
The application of such settlement information shall be used only as provided by this section and shall not otherwise alter the rules of evidence applicable to such court;
(3) A defendant who receives written notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith initiates substantial steps to correct it within ninety days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive.
(3) A defendant who receives written notice of an alleged website or web content access violation and in good faith initiates substantial steps to correct it within ninety days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website or web content access violation is abusive.
There shall not be a rebuttable presumption that such litigation is abusive litigation if the alleged website access violation is not corrected, as determined by the court, within ninety days after being provided written notice or being served a petition or complaint with sufficient detail to identify and correct the alleged access violation.
There shall not be a rebuttable presumption that such litigation is abusive litigation if the alleged website or web content access violation is not corrected, as determined by the court, within ninety days after being provided written notice or being served a petition or complaint with sufficient detail to identify and correct the alleged access violation.
3.
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 4 & 1272 3.
The attorney general may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents or entities that are the targets of abusive website access litigation as defined in this section.
The attorney general may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents or entities that are the targets of abusive website or web content access litigation as defined in this section.
The attorney general may also issue guidance or determinations clarifying when litigation SS SCS SBs 907, 4 & 1272 practices are deemed abusive, but such determinations shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The attorney general may also issue guidance or determinations clarifying when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such determinations shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
At the conclusion of the litigation alleging a website access violation, the court shall review any determination that such litigation is abusive and any award of attorney's fees under the Missouri supreme court rules of professional conduct to determine the reasonableness of the award before issuing a judgment.
At the conclusion of the litigation alleging a website or web content access violation, the court shall review any determination that such litigation is abusive and any award of attorney's fees under the Missouri supreme court rules of professional conduct to determine the reasonableness of the award before issuing a judgment.
If the United States Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.
If the United States Department of Justice issues standards concerning website or web content accessibility under Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.
Upon receipt of such notification by the revisor, the provisions of this section shall expire with respect to any entity that has filed with the Missouri secretary of state's office under chapter 351.
Upon receipt of such notification by the revisor, the provisions of this section shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered with the Missouri secretary of state's office or the state of Missouri or any HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 5 & 1272 political subdivision thereof, including all boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or in accordance with state law or regulations.
The provisions of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of this section shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of SS SCS SBs 907, 5 & 1272 this section prior to August 28, 2026, or that is within the ninety-day correction period after August 28, 2026.
The provisions of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of this section shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of this section prior to August 28, 2026, or that is within the ninety-day correction period after August 28, 2026.
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (7)

Action History

  1. Letter of approval from the Governor

  2. Signed by Governor

  3. Reported Duly Enrolled Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions & Ethics Committee

  4. Signed by Senate President Pro Tem

  5. Signed by House Speaker

  6. Delivered to Governor

  7. S concurs in HCS, as amended

  8. S Third Read and Passed

  9. Truly Agreed To and Finally Passed

  10. HA 1 to HCS H offered & adopted (Seitz)--(5627H09.03H)

  11. HA 2 to HCS H offered & adopted (Seitz)--(5627H09.02H)

  12. HCS, as amended, H adopted --(5627H.09C)

  13. H Third Read and Passed

  14. HCS Reported Do Pass H Consent and Procedure

  15. HCS Voted Do Pass H Consent and Procedure

  16. HCS Voted Do Pass H Commerce - Consent

  17. HCS Reported Do Pass H Commerce - Consent

  18. Referred H Consent and Procedure

  19. Hearing Conducted H Commerce

  20. H Second Read

  21. Referred H Commerce

  22. S Third Read and Passed

  23. H First Read

  24. SS for SCS S offered (Hudson)--(5627S.07F)

  25. SA 1 to SS for SCS S offered & adopted (Gregory-15)--(5627S07.03S)

  26. SA 2 to SS for SCS S offered & defeated (Webber)--(5627S07.01S)

  27. SS for SCS, as amended, S adopted

  28. Perfected

  29. Reported Truly Perfected S Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions and Ethics Committee

  30. Reported from S General Laws Committee w/SCS

  31. SCS Voted Do Pass w/SCS SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 General Laws Committee (5627S.05C)

  32. Hearing Conducted S General Laws Committee

  33. Second Read and Referred S General Laws Committee

  34. S First Read

  35. Prefiled

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 198 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (198)

198 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 198 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

civil-rights technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 907 do?
HCS/SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website or web content access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website or web content access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination. A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website or web content access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website or web content access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition. Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith. The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website or web content access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions. The court may award attorney's fees and costs to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court. If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website or web content accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office, and the state and any political subdivision thereof. This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date. This act is similar to SB 1471 (2026), HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), and HCS/HBs 1842 & 2150 (2026). KATIE O'BRIEN
Who sponsors SB 907?
SB 907 is sponsored by Brad Hudson.
What is the current status of SB 907?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 01, 2025. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 907?
Track SB 907 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 907

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 907

Last checked for changes about 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →