On September 25, California Attorney General (AG) Rob Bonta announced a settlement with Biora Therapeutics, Inc. (Biora) regarding misleading claims the company made concerning the cost of its genetic testing services. Under the settlement agreement, Biora must waive all California customers’ outstanding debts and pay $200,000 in penalties.
The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to mark up a new version of the SAFE Banking Act, now known as the “Secure And Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act” or the SAFER Banking Act (SB 2860). The revised bill addresses concerns around potential bad actors, but also establishes guardrails in the case that federal regulators may want to put pressure on banks to not service certain customers, such as “marijuana-related businesses” or other high-risk industries.
Introduction
On September 12, the New York Cannabis Control Board (CCB) approved final regulations governing the adult-use cannabis industry in New York,[1] marking a long-awaited moment for industry participants and state regulators alike. The CCB’s approval signifies a significant step forward for the state’s cannabis market. The regulations are designed to govern all aspects of the industry, from cultivation and processing to distribution, retail, on-site consumption, and delivery services. Among these regulations, one rule stands out for its complexity and potential impact on industry participants: the definition of a “true party of interest.”
On August 9, a lawsuit was filed in Connecticut that aims to stop all legal cannabis activity in the state and declare the state’s 2021 legalization framework as unconstitutional.[1] The complaint, filed by a local homeowners advocacy group against the Zoning Board of the City of Stamford and the Stamford Mayor, alleges that Connecticut’s legalization framework, the Responsible and Equitable Regulation of Adult-Use Cannabis Act (RERACA), violates both the state and federal constitutions by legalizing federally prohibited conduct, and is therefore preempted under both. In addition, the complaint alleges that the state’s social equity council violates the Connecticut constitution by providing exclusive public emoluments or privileges to certain groups based on race, and that the approval by certain board members of changes in zoning regulations was invalid due to several board members terms having previously expired.
As predicted in our previous articles, the “right to repair” movement continues to garner support as more state governments consider legislating in this area. We previously reported that in 2021, 27 states had pending legislation addressing “right to repair” laws (discussed in our previous article here). Already this year, 33 states have considered some form of “right to repair” legislation.[1] The latest of these legislative efforts comes out of California, where on September 13, the Senate unanimously passed SB-244, the Right to Repair Act.[2] Once Governor Newsom signs the bill into law, California will join Colorado, New York, and Minnesota as the fourth state to enact the “right to repair” legislation.[3] We expect more states to follow.
Michigan Attorney General (AG) Dana Nessel has filed suit against the Gerald R. Ford International Airport Authority to enforce demands by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) related to alleged per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination of the regional drinking water supply caused by the airport authority.
This article was originally published on September 18, 2023 in Westlaw Today and is republished here with permission.
Ketan Bhirud, Drew Mann and Trey Smith of Troutman Pepper discuss the Federal Trade Commission’s role in competition enforcement, contextualize the FTC’s analysis of the generative AI industry and provide key takeaways for stakeholders to consider during a period of regulatory uncertainty.
On September 13, Tennessee Attorney General (AG) Jonathan Skrmetti sent a letter to members of the Net Zero Financial Service Providers Alliance (NZFSPA) warning that their commitment to support “global net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner” may violate state and federal law. Specifically, Skrmetti — and the 22 AGs who co-signed his letter — expressed “concerns” that NZFSPA’s commitments “may run afoul of” federal antitrust and state consumer protection statutes. The AGs request that NZFSPA members respond by October 13, providing detailed information regarding their “commitments and related policies.”
This summer, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois further bolstered Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act’s (BIPA) nearly unfettered private right of action in Lewis v. Maverick Transportation. In a simple but firm four-page ruling, Judge Rosenstengel denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, holding that a cause of action under BIPA does not require a plaintiff to plead that data collected is used for identification purposes. The ruling serves to highlight the apparent lack of any real technical defenses to the statute — making it imperative that companies focus on strict compliance before they find themselves in court.
Jean Smith-Gonnell, Nick Ramos, and Christina Sava published the article, “Troutman Pepper Provides Hemp Derivatives Insight” in Vapor Voice on September 15, 2023.
Across the United States hemp products seem to be everywhere. From corner stores to spas, one can find a hemp- or CBD-infused version of almost anything. Hemp and its derivatives are