The Texas attorney general (AG) announced a $41.5 million settlement with Pfizer and Tris Pharma related to allegations that the companies provided adulterated pharmaceutical products to children and manipulated testing to secure Medicaid reimbursement in violation of the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act (THFPA).
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has abruptly reversed a recently approved rule change that would have permitted college athletes and athletic department staff to bet on professional sports. Under a rarely used override process, more than two-thirds of Division I member schools voted within a 30-day window last month to rescind the proposal. The threshold was reached on November 21, nullifying the rule change before it could take effect. As a result, the longstanding ban on sports wagering by NCAA student-athletes and staff remains in place across all three NCAA divisions. However, even if the rule had been implemented, college athletes and athletic department staff would still have been barred from betting on any NCAA contests, as the rescinded change only concerned wagering on professional sports. The vote to revoke the new rule underscores the NCAA membership’s cautious stance amid an evolving sports betting landscape.
On November 10, New York’s Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act officially took effect, requiring businesses that use individuals’ personal data to set prices to comply with the act’s disclosure requirements. New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James, charged with enforcement of this new law, has stated that enforcement is a top priority and has urged businesses
On September 18, 2025, the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (NJDOL) and the Office of the New Jersey Attorney General (AG) announced that Lyft had paid $19,435,087.06 for allegedly misclassifying its employees as independent contractors.
On October 10, 2025, Illinois Attorney General (AG) Kwame Raoul filed a lawsuit on behalf of Ann Gillespie, director of the Illinois Department of Insurance (the Department), against four different entities, all within the State Farm corporate umbrella. This lawsuit arises from State Farm’s alleged refusal to comply with financial examination warrants issued by Director Gillespie, which aim to force State Farm to disclose information about the policies it writes and the premiums it charges. As insurance regulation is a creature of state law, the Department’s director oversees the enforcement and execution of all insurance laws in Illinois. Further, AG Raoul has authority to bring lawsuits on behalf of other Illinois state agencies.
On September 29, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 53, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, into law. The bill will go into effect on January 1, 2026. The act builds upon the recommendations found in the “California Report on Frontier AI Policy,” which was released to the public on June 17, 2025. This report detailed key principles to guide the legislation drafting process, including grounding AI policy in empirical research and providing greater transparency into AI systems. Given that California is home to 32 of the top 50 AI companies worldwide, the state dominates the AI industry. It is no surprise that California is the first state to create rules promoting safety, transparency, and incident reporting for frontier models. This new act is expected to set the stage for similar AI legislation across the U.S.
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 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.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Utah Department of Commerce’s Division of Consumer Protection (Division), represented by the Office of the Utah Attorney General (AG), recently announced a proposed consent order with Aylo, the company that owns and operates pornography websites, including Pornhub.com and Redtube.com. The proposed consent order includes the implementation of a compliance program and a $5 million penalty.