In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, host Ashley Taylor is joined by Colorado Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez and Troutman Pepper Locke Privacy + Cyber partner David Stauss for an in‑depth discussion of the Colorado AI Act — widely viewed as the nation’s first comprehensive legislative framework focused on high‑risk AI systems and algorithmic discrimination. Senator Rodriguez explains how Colorado’s work on consumer privacy laid the groundwork for AI regulation and walks through the origins, goals, and core provisions of the Act, including its emphasis on transparency, risk assessments, and protecting consumers in sectors such as employment, housing, health care, education, finance, and government services.

Last month, Ohio and nine other state attorneys general (collectively, the AGs) entered into an assurance of voluntary compliance (AV) with Menard Inc. d/b/a Menards, a Wisconsin-based home improvement retailer. The settlement resolved the AGs’ allegations concerning deceptive rebate advertising and price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic. Menards will pay $4.25 million to the multistate group, in addition to making several changes primarily related to the company’s rebate and advertising business practices.

On December 19, 2025, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law the Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable (FAIR) Business Practices Act. The FAIR Act, which was proposed by Attorney General (AG) Tish James, represents the first major update to the state’s primary consumer protection law in 45 years and significantly broadens the statute’s reach.

On December 11, 2025, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law two bills governing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in advertising. The governor’s office described the bills as “first-in-the-nation legislation to protect consumers and boost AI transparency in the film industry.” Both bills unanimously passed through the New York Legislature.

Texas Attorney General (AG) Ken Paxton has launched another challenge to the electronic health record (EHR) industry, filing suit against Epic Systems Corporation. At its core, the lawsuit accuses Epic of transforming patient medical records into a private gatekeeping tool — one that allegedly blocks competition, restricts lawful access to data, and undermines parental rights under Texas law. 

We recently covered this case here, in which a small manufacturer and retailer sued the Virginia attorney general (AG) and tax commissioner in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, seeking to enjoin enforcement of the vapor product directory law. See Nova Distro, Inc., et al. v. Miyares et al., No. 3:25-cv-857 (E.D.V.A.). There, we also noted another ongoing case challenging a similar law in North Carolina, for which oral argument is scheduled before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on January 29, 2026. See Vapor Technology Association, et al. v. Wooten et al., No. 25-1745 (4th Cir.).

Washington Attorney General (AG) Nick Brown announced a settlement with Central Washington Health Services Association, doing business as Confluence Health, over its handling of charity care refunds. The AG alleges that since 2021, thousands of low-income patients at Confluence’s two hospitals made payments toward their hospital bills and were later approved for charity care under Washington’s Charity Care Act, but did not receive refunds of those payments. The act, which was expanded in 2022, requires most Washington hospitals to provide free or discounted care to patients with household incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level.

On December 17, New Jersey announced its adoption of what its Attorney General is calling the “most comprehensive state-level disparate impact regulations in the country.” Effective December 15, 2025, the Division on Civil Rights’ (DCR) new rules under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) codify guidance on disparate impact discrimination across housing, lending, employment, places of public accommodation, and contracting.