In a recent political development in Nevada, Governor Joe Lombardo vetoed Assembly Bill 44, a legislative effort aimed at curbing alleged price-fixing practices on essential goods and services championed by Nevada Attorney General (AG) Aaron D. Ford.

A statement by the Nevada attorney general’s office issued in May after the bill’s passage through both houses of the Nevada Legislature described the proposed law as “one of AG Ford’s core goals during the 2025 Legislative Session.” In the statement, Ford said the bill “gives my office the tools we need to fight predatory practices that strain folks’ wallets and directly affect their bottom line.”

In a letter to Nevada’s secretary of state regarding the veto, Lombardo labeled the bill as “government overreach” and criticizing its broad language, which he argued could lead to subjective and inconsistent enforcement. In the letter, Lombardo said the bill “fails to recognize that prices reflect complex supply chain dynamics and market forces-not merely alleged predatory intent.”

According to Ford’s statement, the bill (which reportedly passed with only Democratic support and all Republicans opposed) would not have prevented businesses from adjusting prices due to normal market forces, but rather prohibited knowingly deceptive price increases that violate the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

If it had been signed into law, Assembly Bill 44 would have enhanced the Nevada AG’s power to conduct investigations and bring enforcement actions under the Nevada Unfair Trade Practice Act related to the “manipulation” of the price for an “essential good or service.”

Specifically, under the proposed law, illegal price manipulation occurred when a person, alone or with others, knowingly engaged in any deceptive trade practice that: (1) is done with the intent to mislead consumers or to manipulate the market for an essential good or service to the public’s detriment; and (2) was intended to and did cause the price of an essential good or service to increase in a way that: (a) did not reflect basic supply and demand forces, and (b) resulted in a person paying, over a one-year period, an amount for the good or service that represents a percentage increase equal to or greater than the average percentage increase for the most recent five-year average annual percentage change for that category (as set forth in the Personal Consumption Expenditures by State for Nevada, published by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis).

Assembly Bill 44 defined “essential good or service” as “any good or service which is needed on a daily or recurring basis for the livelihood of a person” in one of nine categories: (1) food and beverages purchased for off-premises consumption; (2) clothing and footwear; (3) gasoline and other energy goods; (4) pharmaceuticals and other medical products; (5) housing; (6) household utilities; (7) ground transportation; (8) telecommunication services; and (9) internet access.

Notably, however, the bill exempted conduct relating to rates, fares, allowances, or charges of a transportation network company and conduct relating to prices charged by a resort hotel. According to the AG’s statement, the rates charged by those excluded providers “are already regulated by governmental agencies.”

The bill specifically prohibited private lawsuits for price manipulation and did not otherwise introduce new penalties or enforcement mechanisms beyond those already provided in the Nevada Unfair Trade Practices Act. However, Assembly Bill 44 would have empowered Nevada’s AG to investigate and act against individuals or entities suspected of manipulating prices of essential goods or services. This authority would have included criminal prosecution or civil actions for injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of profits, and civil penalties.

Why It Matters

A significant aspect of the bill was its focus on the rental housing market, which has been an increasing source of state AG scrutiny nationally. The bill’s failure also does not preclude Nevada’s AG from investigating perceived violations of the Nevada Unfair Trade Practice Act in relation to any of the nine categories of essential goods or services outlined in Assembly Bill 44.

Indeed, companies involved in consumer-facing business activities in Nevada that relate to those categories would be advised to review and adjust their pricing and marketing strategies to avoid any appearance of manipulation as it would have been defined under the bill.

Troutman Pepper Locke State Attorneys General Team

	Ashley Taylor – Co-leader and Firm Vice Chair Ashley is co-leader of the firm’s nationally ranked State Attorneys General practice, vice chair of the firm, and a partner in its Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group. He helps his clients navigate the complexities involved with multistate attorneys general investigations and enforcement actions, federal agency actions, and accompanying litigation.
	Clay Friedman – Co-leader Clay co-leads the firm’s State Attorneys General practice and is nationally ranked by Chambers USA for AG Government Relations and in Best Lawyers for Advertising Law. He has dedicated his entire career to state attorney general and federal work, serving for nearly a decade in a senior role and more than 25+ years in private practice. Clay focuses his practice on helping industry-leading companies mitigate the risks associated with state and federal regulatory investigations and associated litigation.
	Chris Carlson Chris advises clients on regulatory, civil, and criminal investigations and litigation. With a background as an assistant attorney general, he provides practical guidance to clients with matters involving state attorneys general and federal regulatory agencies.
	Lauren Fincher Lauren has vast experience handling state attorneys general investigations, navigating complex regulatory compliance matters, and providing strategic counsel in enforcement actions across various industries. She helps clients manage high-stakes regulatory matters and guides them through complex legal landscapes.
	Stephen Piepgrass Stephen leads the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group, representing clients in single and multistate enforcement actions, including inquiries and investigations, as well as litigation involving state attorneys general and other state and federal governmental enforcement bodies. He has significant experience handling actions with federal agencies, including the CFPB and FTC, as well as single plaintiff and class action litigation for clients in highly regulated sectors such as financial services, health care, pharmaceutical, and education.
	Michael Yaghi Mike handles high-profile state attorneys general, FTC, and CFPB investigations by advising clients through these complex government inquiries. He assists clients through the entire life cycle of investigations, from regulatory enforcement through formal litigation.
	Samuel E. “Gene” Fishel Gene is a former regulator with two decades of experience who has overseen state privacy and cybersecurity regulation enforcement, led national, multistate attorneys general privacy investigations, and prosecuted computer crimes at the state and federal levels. He has served at the forefront of state attorney general and federal enforcement, and utilizes this experience to proficiently represent client interests.
	Jay Myers Jay assists clients in heavily regulated industries, including health care, energy, insurance, emerging industries, and data privacy. He provides both regulatory legal advice and government relations strategies. Jay’s past and current clients include Fortune 10 companies, startups, nonprofits, industry associations, and advocacy groups. Recognizing that state government matters are often complex and multifaceted, he utilizes regulatory guidance, government advocacy, or both in tandem to deliver tailored solutions for each client’s unique needs.
	Jessica Birdsong Jessica is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Practice Group. She received her J.D. from the University of Richmond School of Law, magna cum laude, where she served as associate articles editor of the Journal of Law & Technology.
	Blake R. Christopher Blake collaborates with clients on matters related to government contracting, investigations, and disputes. His senior-level government experience generates valuable insights and strategies for clients across a variety of industries.
	Nick Gouverneur Nick is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Practice Group. He received his J.D. from the University of Illinois College of Law, where he served as a member of the Journal of Law, Technology & Policy.
	Troy Homesley Troy is an accomplished litigator who has represented and defended clients across a wide range of complex, high-stakes disputes at both the trial and appellate levels. He has represented technology companies, business executives, law firms, investment funds, high-ranking federal officials, international non-profits, and asylum seekers. Troy draws on his broad litigation experience to advise clients before litigation arises, while claims are pending or threatened, and leading up to and through trial and appeals.
	Natalia Jacobo Natalia is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy and Enforcement (RISE) practice, based on the West Coast. She routinely counsels clients on a variety of state and federal regulatory matters, with a particular emphasis on consumer protection and data privacy matters.
	Namrata Kang Namrata (Nam) is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group, based in the Washington, D.C. office. She routinely advises clients on a wide variety of state and federal regulatory matters, with a particular emphasis on state consumer protection laws relating to consumer financial services and marketing and advertising. Nam’s experience transcends multiple industries, including financial services, telecommunications, media, and sports betting.
	Michael Lafleur Michael is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy, and Enforcement Practice Group. Based out of the firm’s Boston office, Mike has deep experience in litigation, investigations, and other regulatory matters involving state-level regulators and state attorneys general.
	Lane Page Lane specializes in federal and state regulatory investigations and complex civil litigation. He focuses on representing financial institutions and other businesses, with a particular emphasis on consumer protection and fair lending issues.
	Dascher Pasco Dascher is an attorney within the Regulatory Investigations, Strategy, and Enforcement practice, based in the Richmond office. She joined our firm after working in personal injury and medical malpractice for a Virginia trial law firm. Dascher brings varied legal experience to the firm with strong litigation and regulatory strategy capabilities.
	Kyara Rivera Rivera Kyara is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Practice Group. She received her J.D. from the University of Richmond School of Law, cum laude, where she served as publications and online editor of the Public Interest Law Review.
	Trey Smith Trey focuses his practice on representing and advising regulated utilities before state public utility commissions. He routinely helps clients obtain certificates of public convenience and necessity for transmission infrastructure. In this role, Trey works with his clients’ subject-matter experts to manage administrative proceedings, including by preparing initial filings; responding to discovery requests; drafting rebuttal testimony; and litigating any disputed issues.
	Daniel Waltz Dan helps clients navigate all aspects highly regulated relationships between industry participants and federal, state and local governments. Whether engaging with regulators, negotiating transactions or representing clients in the courtroom, he delivers solutions that help his clients achieve their strategic goals.
	Cole White Cole is a member of the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy and Enforcement (RISE) group. He has a decade of experience working in the attorney general community, having joined the firm from the Wyoming Office of the Attorney General, where he was assistant attorney general.
	Stephanie Kozol Stephanie is Troutman Pepper Locke’s senior government relations manager in the state attorneys general department.