In this episode of our special 12 Days of Regulatory Insights podcast series, Chris Carlson, a partner in our RISE practice group and member of the State Attorney General (AG) team, is joined by colleagues Lauren Fincher, also a partner in our RISE practice and State AG team, and Barry Boise, a partner in our Health Care + Life Sciences Litigation practice, to examine how state AGs approached the health care sector in 2025, and what’s coming next in 2026.
What Happened:
A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit revived a suit against certain pharmaceutical distributors brought under West Virginia public nuisance law. The panel held that the effects of over-distributing prescription opioids may constitute a public nuisance under West Virginia law, defined distributors’ duties under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and held that abatement may include monetary funding to remediate alleged community harm. Notably, the Fourth Circuit’s decision comes after the West Virginia Supreme Court declined to determine the scope of West Virginia public nuisance law, and as a result, the decision refused to limit the scope of public nuisance law without guidance from the West Virginia Supreme Court.
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.
What Happened
On July 16, 49 attorneys general (AGs) announced that they joined a $202 million settlement with Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Gilead). Previously announced by the Department of Justice in April, the settlement resolved allegations that the company incentivized doctors to prescribe its medication through HIV speaker programs.
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.
On June 30, 2025, New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James announced new lawsuits, criminal charges, and settlements with 25 New York transportation companies related to alleged schemes to defraud Medicaid of millions.
In Part Two of this FAQ series, we continue to break down Virginia’s Senate Bill 754, Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices, etc., reproductive or sexual health information (Act), which amends the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA). The law went into effect on July 1, 2025.
In May, California’s attorney general (AG) charged a local dermatologist with more than 20 counts of fraud after uncovering a scheme that allegedly resulted in the state’s Medicaid program paying out over $1.3 million for services that were never rendered.
Connecticut Attorney General (AG) William Tong has taken legal action against two online distributors, Triggered Brand and Made In China, for allegedly selling research-grade GLP-1 weight loss drugs directly to Connecticut consumers without prescriptions or medical oversight. These drugs, marketed as research compounds, lack Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for human use. The lawsuit against Triggered Brand alleges violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) and seeks civil penalties. Additionally, Tong has issued a civil investigative demand to Made In China to gather information regarding its marketing and sales practices.
On May 8, the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County ordered a health care company to pay more than $30 million in restitution to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) due to the company’s alleged fraudulent billing practices. The underlying criminal convictions and the resulting restitution order reflect a broader trend among state attorneys general (AG), who are taking a more active role in prosecuting and pursuing various forms of health care fraud.