On June 10, 2026, the New York State Legislature passed the One Fair Price Act (S.8623B/A.9349B), first-in-the-nation legislation that bans surveillance pricing. Championed by New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James and sponsored by Assemblymember Emérita Torres and Senator Rachel May, the bill now heads to Governor Kathy Hochul for signature. Troutman previously reported on the legislation here.
On June 10, 2026, a coalition of 18 state attorneys general entered into a $4.88 million settlement with GS Labs, LLC, resolving claims that the now-defunct testing company overcharged consumers for COVID-19 tests and engaged in deceptive advertising practices during the pandemic. The settlement requires GS Labs to pay up to $3.63 million in consumer restitution and $1.25 million in costs and fees to the states. The enforcement action highlights ongoing state-level efforts to hold companies accountable for alleged pandemic-era price gouging and deceptive trade practices and offers lessons for companies navigating consumer protection compliance during public health emergencies and beyond.
On June 4, 2026, Texas Attorney General (AG) Ken Paxton announced an investigation into Celsius Holdings, Inc. (Celsius) regarding the marketing of its Alani Nu energy drinks and whether the company misrepresents their safety to teens and children, in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). The Texas AG stated that the probe was prompted by the tragic death of a 17-year-old Texas cheerleader, whose family filed a wrongful death lawsuit claiming she died from an enlarged heart allegedly caused by excessive caffeine consumption.
On June 4, 2026, Illinois Attorney General (AG) Kwame Raoul announced a settlement with Rushmore Energy, LLC (Rushmore), resolving allegations that the company violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. In addition to a $500,000 monetary payment, the consent order requires the company to suspend marketing activities and impose training policies and procedures.
On Monday, Andy Wilson began serving as Ohio’s 52nd attorney general (AG), following his appointment by Governor Mike DeWine to serve the remainder of former AG Dave Yost’s term. His selection comes after Yost resigned to join the Alliance Defending Freedom as its vice president of strategic research and innovation.
Chambers & Partners has spoken — and Troutman Pepper Locke’s regulatory capabilities have earned the profession’s most respected recognition. In the 2026 Chambers USA guide, the firm received Band 1 Nationwide rankings, the highest available, in both its State Attorneys General and Consumer Financial Services practices:
On May 26, 2026, a bipartisan coalition of 44 attorneys general (AGs) issued a letter opposing the federal Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act), H.R. 7757. The AGs assert that the KIDS Act would preempt their ability to enforce child online safety laws at the state level.
On May 20, the Missouri attorney general (AG) filed suit in Missouri state court against the cryptocurrency ATM operator GPD Holdings LLC, which does business as CoinFlip. The AG alleges that CoinFlip violated Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act by failing to adequately protect consumers from fraud involving its machines and by not clearly disclosing the full extent of its transaction fees. CoinFlip has denied the allegations and stated that it intends to contest the lawsuit.
On May 11, 2026, the Washington attorney general (AG) settled with Homeaglow Inc. d/b/a Dazzling Cleaning (Homeaglow), a cleaning service company, and related parties, for $2.25 million over alleged violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act for unfair and deceptive advertising and negative option membership practices.
On May 15, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit partially blocked Maryland’s new “greenwashing” law for retail electricity suppliers. Holding that the statute’s core advertising restriction likely violates the First Amendment, the court ordered a preliminary injunction against the provision limiting use of terms like “clean,” “green,” and “100% renewable” if the legislature’s specified conditions were not met. In contrast, the court remanded for further proceedings on Maryland’s newly issued disclosure requirements. The decision underscores the constitutional limits on how far states can go in policing environmental marketing claims — limits that are relevant to companies both in and outside the energy sector.