A new lawsuit alleges that a major online retailer is denying equal access to its website for blind and visually impaired customers, raising questions about compliance with federal disability law in the digital marketplace. The complaint was filed by Tanisia Bowman on March 27, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against eCosmetics, Inc.
According to the court filing, Bowman is legally blind and requires screen-reading software to navigate websites. She brings this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, arguing that eCosmetics has failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website (https://www.ecosmetics.com/) so it is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or visually impaired. The complaint states that this failure constitutes a violation of Bowman’s rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The document outlines that approximately 8.1 million people in the United States are visually impaired according to a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, including 2 million who are blind. In Illinois alone, an estimated 260,000 individuals are visually impaired based on a 2019 report from the American Foundation for the Blind. Bowman claims that despite technological advances and widely available solutions for web accessibility—such as alternative text for images and keyboard navigation—eCosmetics’ website remains inaccessible to those using assistive technologies like screen readers.
Bowman describes her experience attempting to purchase a fragrance gift set from eCosmetics.com on March 9, 2026. She reports encountering multiple barriers: navigation menus were not accessible via keyboard; dialog boxes did not shift focus appropriately; status messages were not announced by her screen reader; and shopping cart elements lacked descriptive text necessary for identification by assistive technology. As a result of these issues, she was unable to complete her purchase independently.
The complaint details specific technical shortcomings observed during Bowman’s use of JAWS screen-reader software: “Landmark structure was incorrectly defined,” “heading roles were applied to non-informative elements,” sub-menus could not be accessed via keyboard controls such as ‘tab’ or ‘arrow’ keys, icons lacked appropriate alternative text descriptions, and automatic pop-up windows caused disorientation because their appearance was not announced by assistive technology. Additionally, Bowman notes that transactions require mouse use—a method unavailable to many visually impaired users—further excluding them from making purchases.
Bowman argues that these barriers prevent blind and visually impaired individuals from accessing goods and services offered through eCosmetics’ website on an equal basis with sighted customers. She cites established guidelines such as version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which provide standards for making websites usable by people with disabilities.
The legal arguments presented in the filing center on Title III of the ADA, which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation—including websites operated by businesses offering goods or services to consumers. The complaint asserts that eCosmetics’ site meets this definition but fails to provide reasonable modifications or auxiliary aids necessary for full access by individuals with visual impairments.
Bowman seeks certification of a nationwide class consisting of all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access eCosmetics.com and been denied full enjoyment of its offerings due to accessibility barriers during the relevant statutory period. The relief requested includes preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring eCosmetics to bring its website into compliance with ADA requirements; declaratory judgment recognizing current practices as discriminatory; compensatory damages; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs; attorneys’ fees; expert fees; class certification; appointment of class counsel; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case is being handled by Alison Chan of Equal Access Law Group PLLC as attorney for Bowman. The case number is 1:26-cv-3390.
Source: 126cv03390_Tanisia_Bowman_v_eCosmeticsComplaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf