United States Department of Justice Sues Uber for $125 Million

by Chris Danielsen

On October 15, 2024, members of the National Federation of the Blind and our allies protested denials of rideshare service to guide dog users and other blind and deafblind people in front of both Uber and Lyft’s headquarters facilities in San Francisco. There have been significant developments since then, including the rollout by both companies of features allowing guide dog or service animal users to voluntarily self-identify to facilitate a more streamlined reporting and follow-up process. At the same time, Federationists have continued to report violations not only to the companies, but to the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division. The reports to the Justice Department have now borne fruit.

On September 11, 2025, DOJ filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Uber under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint focuses on the denial of rides to blind and deafblind people who use guide dogs and extends to other service dog users and wheelchair users. DOJ says that it brings the action based on reasonable cause determinations that “Uber has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against people with disabilities” and that “a person or group of persons has been discriminated against, and that Uber’s discrimination raises an issue of general public importance.” The lawsuit seeks court orders to stop the discrimination and $125 million in compensatory damages for individuals who have reported discrimination, as well as civil penalties of up to $100,000 per violation.

The ninety-plus-page complaint is sweeping, and many of its details are distressing to read. It describes how Uber and its drivers have routinely refused service, imposed illegal surcharges and cleaning fees, and failed to modify policies that would accommodate riders’ disabilities. It alleges that Uber knew of these problems but failed to take preventive measures such as adequately training drivers, monitoring compliance, or providing meaningful relief to those harmed. It cites instances where there is evidence that drivers remained on Uber’s platform even after flagrantly violating riders’ rights.

The DOJ details many harrowing incidents. Blind riders like Michael May and Ryan Dour faced repeated denials after informing drivers they traveled with guide dogs, causing anxiety and missed appointments. Deafblind rider Valerie Hyatt endured drivers calling her service animal “filthy” and deliberately engaging in intimidating and frightening behaviors, such as taking detours, making unnecessary and unplanned stops, playing loud music, and accusing her of lying about her disabilities. After being denied multiple rides and missing his flight, veteran Jason Ludwig—who uses a service dog to help with his walking, balance, and daily tasks—had to endure a sixteen-hour drive in a rental car, which aggravated his chronic back pain to the point where he could not stand or walk when he arrived home and had to remain in bed and miss work for five days. Despite the considerable expense of the missed flight and rental car, Uber’s insulting solution was to offer Mr. Ludwig a $15 ride credit. Wheelchair users like a seven-year-old boy identified as “J.E.” and medical physicist Kingsly Joseph repeatedly experienced drivers refusing to transport them because the drivers claimed they could not stow a collapsible wheelchair in their vehicles, even in cases where the vehicle was obviously large enough. J.E.’s mother noted that these experiences, as well as insensitive and intrusive questions from drivers, caused her son to have more depression and anxiety about his disability and to become reluctant to travel. Riders with inflexible prosthetic limbs, like Elizabeth Lawrence, were denied the simple accommodation of sitting in the front seat for more leg room.

The complaint further alleges that Uber discouraged complaints by limiting account credits for riders who repeatedly faced discrimination and subsequently sought refunds. It also alleges that Uber failed to share the outcomes of investigations, leaving victims without recourse and allowing violating drivers to continue operating. It notes the rollout of the self-identification feature—which it says occurred after Uber was notified of the DOJ investigation leading to this enforcement action—but alleges that this has had little to no effect on denials.

Persistence and Patience Pay Off

This lawsuit is the culmination of years of effort by the National Federation of the Blind to spur DOJ action. Our long quest for justice is the reason that President Mark Riccobono and our national leadership requested that riders report discrimination to DOJ as well as through our rideshare survey and to Uber and Lyft directly. We know that reporting can be tedious and time-consuming, especially considering that discrimination persists, but we now know for sure that DOJ is listening and accumulating evidence to take Uber to court. The lawsuit represents our collective effort, but our government can bring pressure to bear on Uber that simply was not available to any individual or even to the Federation as an organizational plaintiff.

One hundred twenty-five million dollars is a substantial number, and it is undoubtedly focusing Uber’s attention and drawing the notice of Lyft and other rideshare providers as well. Pursuant to its specific powers under the ADA, DOJ is also seeking a civil penalty of $50,000 for a first violation and $100,000 for each subsequent violation to “vindicate the public interest in eliminating disability discrimination.” To reduce the possible civil penalties, Uber needs to show that it has made or is making good-faith efforts to end the discrimination. Money aside, it is in Uber’s interest to take much more aggressive action than it has so far to finally stop the denials.

A Call to Ongoing Action

This historic lawsuit underscores the essential role the National Federation of the Blind has played—and will continue to play—in the fight for equal access to transportation. By organizing protests, documenting violations, and urging members to report discrimination to DOJ, we helped to build an extensive record that made this enforcement action possible. But our work does not end here. We will closely monitor the progress of this case; push for meaningful remedies beyond monetary damages; and continue to hold Uber, Lyft, and all transportation providers accountable. Together, we will not only ensure compliance with the law but also secure the dignity, independence, and full participation that blind, deafblind, and disabled riders demand and deserve.