Consumer Protection

On July 10, 2026, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (“DCWP”) Commissioner Samuel Levine announced the adoption of a new “Click to Cancel” rule governing how businesses disclose, bill, and cancel subscriptions. The rule takes effect October 1, 2026.

Continue Reading New York City Adopts ‘Click to Cancel’ Rule

On July 9, 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU” or “Court”) delivered its judgment in Sky Österreich Fernsehen (C-234/25), deciding that a streaming offering constitutes a digital service under the Consumer Rights Directive (Directive 2011/83/EU), rather than digital content, where the trader’s offering is of a dynamic nature and goes beyond the stable or continuous provision of specific content. As a result, providers of such streaming offerings cannot rely on the Consumer Rights Directive’s exception to the right of withdrawal for digital content.

The judgment has broad implications for providers of personalised digital services, as it affects whether consumers can cancel a subscription during the 14-day withdrawal period and, if they do, how much providers may charge for use of the service during that period.

Continue Reading CJEU Decides When Streaming Subscriptions Are Subject to the Right of Withdrawal

On July 1, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued a proposed policy statement addressing what it describes as the “suppression of accuracy” in artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems and is seeking public comment through July 31, 2026. The proposal was issued pursuant to Executive Order 14365, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence, which directed the FTC to explain how Section 5 of the FTC Act applies when AI developers alter model outputs in response to state law requirements.[1]

Continue Reading FTC Seeks Comment on Proposed Policy Statement Addressing AI Accuracy and Output Steering

On June 29, 2026, in a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that (1) the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) statutory “for‑cause” removal protection for Commissioners violates the Constitution’s separation of powers and (2) President Trump lawfully removed Rebecca Slaughter from the FTC. The Court concluded that because FTC Commissioners exercise executive power, they must be removable by the President at will rather than only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

Continue Reading Supreme Court Holds FTC Removal Protections Unconstitutional

A federal court recently addressed whether plaintiffs alleging misleading commercial email practices in violation of Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act (“CEMA”) have Article III standing to pursue claims. The ruling suggests that alleged violations of CEMA, standing alone, could constitute a concrete injury for Article III standing, where the asserted harm aligns with the statute’s purpose.

Continue Reading Washington Anti-Spam Law Decision Addresses Article III Standing in CEMA Cases

On May 27, the Connecticut governor signed SB 4, an omnibus privacy law, followed a week later by two clean-up bills, HB 2222 and HB 5563 (collectively “SB 4”). SB 4, among other things, amends the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (“CTDPA”), establishes a data broker registry and accessible deletion mechanism, imposes restrictions on surveillance pricing, and creates requirements for direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies.

Continue Reading Connecticut Enacts Omnibus Privacy Law

On May 11, 2026, the Department of Justice, acting on notification from the Federal Trade Commission, and the Illinois Attorney General, filed a complaint against “Premium Home Service” and its owner for alleged violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act, the Consumer Reviews Rule, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB Act).  The Complaint seeks injunctive relief, monetary relief, and civil penalties.  

Continue Reading FTC and DOJ Continue Focus on Consumer Reviews Rule with Complaint Against Premium Home Service

On April 28, 2026, Maryland Governor Moore signed HB 895 (the Protection From Predatory Pricing Act) into law, which will impose limitations on the use of personalized pricing in the food retail and grocery delivery context.  The law will go into effect on October 1, 2026.  As we have detailed in prior blog posts, there has been a wave of personalized pricing proposals at the state level, and the FTC is focusing attention on pricing in the grocery sector.

Continue Reading Maryland Enacts Law on Personalized Food Pricing

On April 27, 2026, District of Columbia Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb filed a complaint against Mid‑America Apartment Communities, Inc., and its subsidiaries (collectively, “MAA”) alleging that the landlord charged illegal fees and misled prospective tenants about the true cost of rent. This action is the latest example of state…

Continue Reading DC AG Sues Multifamily Landlord Over Alleged Deceptive Rental Fee Advertising

U.S. state lawmakers have introduced more than 40 bills across at least 24 states to regulate personalized algorithmic pricing in 2026 thus far, already outpacing the number of personalized algorithmic pricing bills introduced in all of 2025.  While their definitions and scope vary, the 2026 bills broadly refer to “personalized…

Continue Reading State Lawmakers Introduce New Wave of Personalized Algorithmic Pricing Bills