An Ohio appellate court recently affirmed the dismissal of a case brought by the Ohio attorney general (AG) against Central Tobacco & Stuff Inc. (Central Tobacco), an e-cigarette retailer, in which the AG alleged that Central Tobacco sold e-cigarettes lacking FDA premarket authorization and violated the state’s Consumer Sales Practices Act (CSPA) by failing to inform consumers about the lack of FDA authorization. See State ex rel. Attorney Gen. Dave Yost v. Cent. Tobacco & Stuff Inc., 2025-Ohio-4613 (Ct. App.). This appears to be a novel use of a state consumer protection law, which most states have, to attempt to enforce the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). The court concluded that federal law preempts Ohio’s ability to enforce FDCA premarket authorization requirements through the CSPA. The court’s decision may be relevant in other cases involving a state’s attempt to enforce FDA premarket authorization requirements through their consumer protection laws.

On September 25, 2025, Amazon agreed to pay $2.5 billion to settle claims brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleging that the company misled consumers into signing up for Prime memberships and made it difficult for them to cancel. The settlement, announced just days into the start of litigation between Amazon and FTC, includes $1 billion in penalties and $1.5 billion in restitution to customers, which the FTC described as one of the largest settlements in the agency’s history.

In this crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Regulatory Oversight, Chris Willis is joined by Joseph DeFazio, Bill Foley, and Michael Yaghi to discuss the implications of New York’s FAIR Act, a significant amendment to the state’s UDAAP statute. The FAIR Act aims to broaden consumer protection by lowering the threshold for legal action against unfair and abusive business practices. With expanded enforcement powers for the state, this legislation could dramatically increase litigation risks for financial services companies operating in New York if the governor signs the bill. Tune in to understand how this legislative shift might affect the industry and what steps businesses can take to prepare.

On September 5, Illinois Attorney General (AG) Kwame Raoul announced the resolution of ongoing litigation against Clearview Electric Inc., an alternative retail electric supplier accused of engaging in fraudulent, unfair, and deceptive business practices. Clearview Energy allegedly misled Illinois consumers into paying significantly higher rates for electricity compared to those who remained with their default public utility.

In May, we wrote about the Trump administration’s first major enforcement action involving the importation of unauthorized e-cigarettes, in which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized products valued at nearly $34 million. FDA and CBP have once again seized unauthorized e-cigarettes in Chicago, but this time the estimated retail value was $86.5 million — the largest seizure of its kind. This enforcement action is consistent with a statement on FDA’s website: “[e]nforcing against unauthorized ENDS products, including unauthorized products popular with youth, are [sic] among our highest enforcement priorities.” FDA maintains that decisions about whether to take enforcement action will continue to be made on a case-by-case basis after considering youth use and other risk factors.

On August 12, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ordered Match Group, owners and operators of online dating platforms such as Match.com, OkCupid, PlentyOfFish, The League, and others, to pay $14 million. This settlement resolves the FTC’s 2019 complaint accusing Match of misleading claims involving guarantees and onerous subscription cancellation processes, contrary to the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA).

Massachusetts Attorney General (AG) Andrea Joy Campbell has issued guidelines to help businesses comply with the recently enacted consumer protection regulations, prohibiting “junk fees” and providing consumers with greater transparency regarding trial and subscription offers. We previously covered these regulations in detail here.

Introduction

The United States is navigating a new era of regulatory oversight and the balance of power between federal and state regulators following the 2024 election cycle. As federal agencies retreat from and/or realign their regulatory enforcement priorities, state attorneys general (AGs) are increasingly taking the lead in policing companies — especially those that are consumer-facing — bridging perceived gaps left by shifting federal priorities, and in some cases, emboldened to expand regulatory enforcement into relatively new arenas.