As we enter summer’s homestretch, the State Attorneys General remain active as ever.
In this edition of Orrick’s State AG Update we discuss new “junk fee” rules from the Massachusetts AG, high-profile consumer protection investigations and lawsuits by the Florida and Kentucky AGs, and Democratic AGs’ legal challenges to federal executive orders and actions. We also spotlight Minnesota’s new data privacy law and Washington state’s new premerger notification law. Rounding out this issue, we highlight Nevada AG Ford’s official entry into the governor’s race and preview several upcoming state AG conferences. Finally, this edition includes Nevada AG Ford’s official announcement of his run for governor, and previews upcoming state AG conferences.
I. Consumer Protection
Massachusetts Attorney General Issues Updated Guidance Regarding New “Junk Fee” Rules
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell issued updated guidance and produced a webinar to help businesses operating in Massachusetts comply with the so-called “Junk Fee” regulations.
The regulations make clear that hidden “junk fees” and related billing practices violate the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act. As such, the regulations impose various rules on businesses to prohibit unfair and deceptive practices related to “junk fees,” including during the marketing and sale of products and services, and in connection to trial offers and recurring charges.
Specifically, the regulations require businesses to clearly disclose:
- the total price of a product, including any mandatory charges or fees, whenever pricing information is presented to a consumer and prior to requiring a consumer to provide their personal information;
- the nature, purpose, and amount of any charges that may be imposed on a transaction; and
- whether any charges are optional or waivable, along with readily available instructions on how to avoid any optional or waivable charges.
One of the rule’s key provisions addresses negative option features, or a contract that allows the seller to interpret a customer’s inaction or silence as acceptance of an offer. For example, under the new rule, if a product includes a negative option feature, the total price for the negative option feature may be displayed as the total price for a single negative option term. (e.g., the first month). If that term includes additional fees or expenses, the total price for that term must include those fees or expenses. These regulations do not prohibit a seller from also accurately displaying the price for other or future terms.
The new rule goes into effect September 2, 2025.
Kentucky Attorney General Sues Chinese Company for Consumer Protection Violations
Attorney General Russell Coleman filed a complaint against the Chinese online shopping platform Temu for allegedly unlawful data collection, privacy violations, and counterfeiting some of Kentucky’s most iconic brands.
Temu is one of the most-downloaded mobile apps in the U.S. According to the lawsuit, the company has used that new-found popularity to collect massive quantities of information about customers without their knowledge or consent.
The complaint alleges that Temu:
- illegally collects users’ data without their knowledge and consent;
- allows unfettered access to that data to the Chinese government;
- steals the intellectual property of U.S.-owned companies, including some of Kentucky’s most iconic brands such as the University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, Buffalo Trace Distillery, and Churchill Downs; and
- uses forced labor from Chinese ethnic minorities in clear violation of U.S. trade policies.
Temu is owned by a Chinese holding company, PDD Holdings, whose first retail app, Pinduoduo, was eventually banned from U.S. app stores for containing malware. The complaint alleges the Temu app shares a significant amount of its code with the original Pinduoduo app and has a documented relationship with the Chinese Communist Party.
In addition to misusing Kentuckians’ personal information, the complaint alleges Temu is committing other consumer fraud, from advertising items that look nothing like the items that eventually arrive and faking customer reviews, to using consumer payment information to order items the customer never asked for.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier Launches Investigation into Climate Organizations for Potential Consumer Protection and Antitrust Violations
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced that his office issued subpoenas to investigate whether the CDP (formerly the Climate Disclosure Project) and the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) violated state consumer protection or antitrust laws by allegedly coercing companies into disclosing proprietary data and paying for access to that data under the guise of environmental transparency.
According to AG Uthmeier, CDP was founded by British ESG activists to “dematerialize economic growth” and “prevent dangerous climate change.” It runs the world’s largest environmental disclosure system, charging companies to report, revise, and promote their data, while selling services that allegedly improve scores and even offer favorable quotes from CDP executives for a price. Their scoring system is tied to corporate access to capital with investment giants such as Bloomberg, ISS, S&P Global, and Santander reportedly relying on CDP data to make financial decisions.
AG Uthmeier further described SBTi as being co-founded by CDP and the United Nations Global Compact, which sells companies validation of their climate goals—then directs them back to CDP to report their progress, creating what appears to be a profit-driven feedback loop.
Attorney General Uthmeier’s investigation will examine deceptive trade practices such as:
- selling services to obtain better scores and public endorsements;
- creating incentives for corporations to pay in exchange for favorable treatment; and
- misrepresenting the objectivity of environmental data used by investors and consumers.
The investigation will also explore potential antitrust violations, including:
- whether coordination between CDP, financial institutions, and investment services constitutes unlawful market manipulation; and
- whether CDP’s efforts to pressure or punish companies that don’t participate result in anticompetitive effects.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier Announces Investigation into Crypto Platform for Consumer Protection Violations
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced an investigation into a crypto platform after issuing a subpoena seeking internal documents. AG Uthmeier alleges the platform is violating Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Practices Act by falsely promoting itself as the least expensive way to purchase crypto when there is evidence to suggest that is not true.
According to AG Uthmeier, the platform induces customers to its platform by claiming to offer the “lowest cost on average” to trade cryptocurrency and promising to deliver customers “the most crypto for your money.” AG Uthmeier claims there is evidence that trading on the platform is more expensive than trading on competing platforms due to its payment-for-order flow structure versus competitors’ all-in trading costs. The Attorney General further argues this is because third parties that pay the platform for order flow might have to charge less favorable prices to the platform’s customers they trade with to be profitable.
Iowa Attorney General Objects to Class Action Settlement Involving TD Ameritrade Acquisition
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird filed an objection to the proposed settlement in a class-action lawsuit in which lawyers would receive $9 million while consumers would receive nothing.
A class of plaintiffs sued a retail brokerage after it purchased TD Ameritrade. The plaintiffs claimed the purchase violated antitrust laws, asked for significant damages, and demanded that the sale be reversed. In this settlement, however, class members—the brokerage’s customers—received nothing. Instead, the brokerage will pay three named plaintiffs $5,050 each, pay a group of lawyers for “antitrust monitoring,” and pay the plaintiffs’ lawyers fees and costs of $9 million.
According to the Attorney General’s objection memo, the “Class Action Fairness Act tasks Attorneys General with monitoring and protecting their citizens from class actions that violate Rule 23. See 28 U.S.C. § 1715(b).” The memo further states that Class action settlement principles require that class members—not class counsel—be the primary beneficiaries of a settlement, and that class representatives (both Plaintiffs’ counsel and the named Plaintiffs) show undivided loyalty to the class.
The Attorney General claims that the proposed settlement violates these principles and therefore should be rejected.
II. Environmental
Democratic State AGs Issue Environmental Justice Guidance
Democratic state Attorneys General, led by California, Massachusetts, and New York, recently issued a memorandum providing guidance “affirming the importance and legality of environmental justice initiatives.”
According to the memo, several recent federal executive orders and actions targeting environmental justice initiatives have had a chilling effect on these efforts. According to the memo, “these federal actions label environmental justice policies, programs, and activities as ‘illegal discrimination’—an inaccurate and misleading characterization that only generates confusion.”
The memo further provides that the “President cannot alter the laws passed by Congress, nor can his executive orders or agency memoranda change the protections afforded by the Constitution or state law.”
Additionally, the memo asserts that “complementary, environmental justice is a distinct concept that addresses distinct challenges from diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. Like the best practices for workplace diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility addressed in the February 2025 guidance from multiple state attorneys general, the advancement of environmental justice is not only lawful but also benefits the public.”
Finally, the memo explains the various ways in which existing environmental justice actions are supported by existing law:
- federal environmental laws (e.g., federal Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, etc.) support environmental justice;
- the U.S. Constitution and federal civil rights laws contemplate advancement of environmental justice; and
- environmental justice practices are protected by the First Amendment and nonprofit laws.
III. Data Privacy
Minnesota Data Privacy Law Goes Into Effect
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison announced that the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act (MCDPA) took effect on July 31. The Attorney General has enforcement authority over the law.
According to the Attorney General’s announcement, companies doing business in Minnesota have certain legal obligations when collecting and protecting consumer data:
- businesses must have an accessible privacy notice with contact information and an electronic means for Minnesotans to exercise their individual consumer rights;
- businesses must limit the collection of personal data to what is necessary and to what was disclosed to the consumer;
- businesses may not retain data that is no longer relevant and reasonably necessary;
- businesses must have data security practices to protect personal data and must conduct data assessments; and
- businesses must obtain a consumer’s consent before collecting or selling their sensitive data.
State Attorney General Enforcement: The new law contains a cure period during the first six months. During that time, if the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office believes an entity is violating the MCDPA, the law requires the office to notify the business in writing of the alleged violation and give that business 30 days to correct it. If, after 30 days, the Attorney General believes the entity has failed to cure the violation, the Attorney General can then bring an enforcement action. This cure period, which expires on January 31, 2026, is designed to help businesses adapt to this new law.
IV. Lawsuits Challenging Federal Government
Democratic AGs File a Lawsuit Challenging Trump Administration’s Demand for SNAP Recipients’ Personal Information
Attorneys General from 20 Democratic states and the District of Columbia filed a complaint alleging the U.S. Department of Agriculture has made an “unprecedented demand” that states turn over sensitive and personal information about tens of millions of Americans who have applied for food assistance through the stated-administrated Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The complaint alleges the federal actions violate the American Procedure Act (APA) because they are arbitrary and capricious, and also violate the APA’s public notice and comment requirements. The state AGs argue that this highly sensitive data, which includes home addresses, Social Security numbers, recent locations, immigration statuses, and more, will likely be shared across federal agencies and used for immigration enforcement, in violation of the law. Attorney General James and the coalition are seeking a court judgment declaring the administration’s new policy illegal and preventing enforcement.
V. Antitrust Enforcement
Washington Becomes First to Implement Uniform Antitrust Premerger Notification Law
Washington will be the first state in the nation to require that companies file a premerger notification with the Washington Attorney General’s Office when they file a premerger notification with the federal government under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. The new law’s purpose is to allow the state to have more lead time to analyze mergers for possible anticompetitive effects and to have access to more information for their analysis.
The premerger notification requirement applies to companies or individuals that:
- have a principal place of business in Washington state;
- directly or indirectly, have annual net sales in Washington of goods or services involved in the proposed merger transaction of at least 20% of the HSR filing threshold (20% of the 2025 HSR filing threshold is $25.28 million); or
- are health care providers.
Washington’s new law is based on model legislation produced by the Uniform Law Commission. Colorado passed a similar law that takes effect on August 6. While these states will now have access to HSR filings when they are made, the state laws do not change federal requirements that federal antitrust agencies obtain a waiver from the merger parties to share information with state enforcers.
VI. Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
Iowa Attorney General Opens Investigation into University of Iowa Over DEI Policies
Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds sent Attorney General Brenna Bird a letter requesting an investigation into whether the University of Iowa is continuing to implement diversity, equity, and inclusion policies despite a state law banning DEI-related spending across Iowa’s public universities—including for training for staff, carving out exemptions for accreditation requirements, and compliance with state and federal laws.
Soon after receiving the investigation request, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird issued the following statement in response:
Regent universities must comply with our state laws including the Iowa Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (“DEI”) Act—Iowa Code Chapter 261J, Iowa Code Chapter 19, and also an Executive Order signed by President Trump on January 22, 2025. We have received the Governor’s complaint against the University of Iowa and have opened an investigation.
VII. Political Update
Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford Announces Candidacy for Governor
VIII. State AG Conferences
- NAAG Presidential Initiative, Portsmouth, NH, August 4-6
- Attorney General Alliance Chair’s Initiative, Girdwood, AK, August 26-29
Keep up with the State AG Event Calendar here.
[View source.]
