What Happened

HCA Healthcare Inc., a major U.S. hospital operator with more than 180 hospitals across 20 states, announced a $3.5 million settlement to address allegations of state consumer protection and labor law violations brought by the attorneys general (AG) of California, Colorado, and Nevada. The allegations centered on HCA’s enforcement of training repayment agreements (TRAs) with new nurses.

In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Stephen Piepgrass, Michael Yaghi, and Dan Waltz conclude their two-part series on the Better Business Bureau (BBB). The group discusses strategies for managing and improving BBB ratings for businesses, while examining how consumer complaints impact potential regulatory actions. They emphasize the importance of addressing these consumer complaints promptly, highlighting the need for effective training and streamlining complaint handling processes within companies to prevent issues from being overlooked.

We recently wrote about a federal case here and here involving key issues related to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) authority to enforce the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act) against federally recognized Indian tribes and ATF’s interpretation of key sections of the PACT Act. In addition to appealing the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s decision, we noted that the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians (the Tribe) asked the district court to require ATF to remove it from the agency’s PACT Act noncompliant list (NCL) and prevent ATF and the other defendant, the Department of Justice from taking action against it pending its appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On July 30, the federal district court denied the Tribe’s request.

The Trump administration’s implementation of tariffs on August 7, 2025, will have profound implications for companies engaged in international supply chains. These tariffs are poised to increase business costs, affecting a wide range of industries reliant on global trade. However, the financial impact is not the only concern for businesses. With the Department of Justice (DOJ) intensifying its focus on enforcement actions related to international trade compliance, companies that attempt to evade these tariffs or fail to establish robust compliance policies and procedures may find themselves among the DOJ’s targets.

In early August, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that the civil money penalty (CMP) provision in the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) for tobacco products, 21 U.S.C. § 333(f)(9), is unconstitutional. Specifically, the court found that the FDCA improperly allows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to bring an administrative action to collect CMPs because the Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in such cases.

On July 28, the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs issued a reminder to more than 3,000 auto dealerships regarding their obligations under the New Jersey data deletion law, N.J.S.A. § 56:12-18.1. This law, enacted and effective in January 2024, requires dealerships to offer data deletion services for consumer information stored in vehicles accepted for resale or lease. Dealerships are now on notice of their compliance obligations under the law.

In July 2025, a bipartisan coalition of 32 state and territorial attorneys general (AG) sent a letter to congressional leaders urging the passage of the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act. Their letter emphasizes that the legislation — a long-stalled federal reform — would provide legal clarity and a safe harbor for banks and financial institutions to serve state-licensed cannabis businesses. Such clarity, they argue, is urgently needed to address public safety risks and to improve the states’ ability to regulate and tax the booming cannabis industry.

Ashley Taylor, Clayton Friedman, Michael Yaghi, Natalia Jacobo, and Jay Myers of Troutman Pepper Locke LLP discuss stepped up enforcement efforts among state attorneys general in the face of the Trump administration’s broad deregulatory agenda and as federal agencies appear to shift litigation priorities.

Read the full article at Reuters and Westlaw Today.

On April 29, Michigan Attorney General (AG) Dana Nessel filed a lawsuit against Roku, Inc. (Roku), the smart TV and device provider and streaming service, alleging Roku violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), federal and state privacy laws, the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, and other laws by collecting children’s personal data and selling it without proper parental consent. The lawsuit sought damages and equitable relief on behalf of Michigan consumers who subscribed to Roku’s streaming service. More information regarding this lawsuit can be found here.