KEYPOINT: A recent putative class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against OpenAI highlights the challenges artificial intelligence (AI) providers face in restricting minors’ access to their services, and underscores the importance of maintaining guardrails that actually enforce a service’s terms and conditions.
On June 30, 2026, New Jersey enacted legislation A5328 (P.L.2026, c.25), which will expose a broad swath of U.S. companies to data broker registration fees ranging from $5,000 to $1.5 million annually. The new legislation is not limited to data brokers in the conventional sense. It applies generally to any company that sells or licenses personal data of New Jersey residents, including those with direct customer relationships. Much of the law takes effect immediately, so companies should begin reviewing the requirements now to comply.
Key point: The amendment significantly expands the existing law’s applicability, redefines “covered design feature,” creates two new prohibitions, and adds a new deletion right.
On April 17, 2026, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen signed LB 838 into law. The omnibus bill addresses several different topics but, as is relevant here, it amends Nebraska’s Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, Neb. Rev. Stats. § 87-1301, et seq, which only went into effect on January 1, 2026. We provided an overview of the existing law here. The amendment goes into effect three months after the legislature’s April 17 adjournment date, on July 17, 2026.
The article below provides a summary of the changes.
A federal court in Michigan significantly narrowed Michigan Attorney General (AG) Dana Nessel’s privacy and consumer protection case against Roku, Inc. (Roku) dismissing all non-Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) claims for lack of standing while allowing the state’s privacy claims under COPPA to proceed. The decision highlights COPPA’s utility as a vehicle for state AGs to bring enforcement actions in federal court, while also underscoring the jurisdictional limits on bringing companion state privacy and consumer protection claims in the same forum.
Key point: Tennessee’s new law prohibits parties that develop or deploy AI systems from advertising or representing to the public that the AI systems can act as a qualified mental health professional.
On April 1, 2026, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed SB 1580 into law, and it will go into effect on July 1, 2026. The new law is short — less than one page — but has potentially significant consequences given that it includes a private right of action.
In the following post, we provide an overview of the new law.
Key point: If enacted, the bill will require GenAI systems to provide a conspicuous warning that GenAI outputs may be inaccurate.
On March 9, 2026, the New York legislature passed A 3411, which requires generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) systems to notify users that the system’s outputs may be inaccurate. The bill will next move to Governor Kathy Hochul for consideration. If it becomes law, the bill will go into effect 90 days from enactment. The bill is short (it contains only 30 lines of text) but has broad implications.
In the article below, we provide background on the bill, an overview of its requirements, and potential implications should it become law.
Key point: Alabama joins the growing list of states that have enacted app store laws.
On February 17, 2026, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed HB 161 into law. In doing so, Alabama joins Texas, Utah, and Louisiana as states having passed app store laws. California passed a similar-in-concept Digital Age
Key point: The California attorney general announced a $2.75 million fine against a company for CCPA violations for failing to honor requests to opt out of the sale or sharing of personal information across all devices and services associated with consumer accounts.
On February 11, 2026, the California attorney general (AG) announced a settlement with a multiplatform entertainment company, resolving alleged California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) violations based on gaps in the company’s opt-out procedures. This is the second public CCPA enforcement settlement arising from the California Department of Justice’s 2024 investigative sweep of streaming services. This also is the largest CCPA settlement amount to date, and is roughly five times the amount of the first enforcement action and more than $1 million more than the prior largest settlement by the AG. These actions reflect an escalating enforcement trajectory as the AG and the California Privacy Protection Agency develop a body of precedent that increasingly functions as operational compliance guidance for businesses. Notably, every CCPA enforcement action to date has involved, in some way, the right to opt out and demonstrates that the AG’s expectations for what constitutes compliant opt-out implementation are becoming both more granular and more demanding with each successive action.
Key point: The Connecticut Office of the Attorney General issued the third annual enforcement report under the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, focusing on the office’s privacy and security efforts, consumer complaints, data breaches, and enforcement priorities.
The Connecticut Office of the Attorney General (OAG) issued its 2025 enforcement report under the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA) last week. This is the third report since the CTDPA went into effect in July 2023. The report provides an update on (1) privacy-related consumer complaints, (2) data breach notice review and enforcement, and (3) enforcement efforts and priorities. Importantly, the OAG emphasized that protecting “kids online remains a topmost priority” and that it would continue to pursue investigations and enforcement actions focused on companies that offer online services, products, or features to consumers under 18.
In the report, the OAG also outlined recent amendments to the CTDPA, which will take effect on July 1, 2026. For more information regarding these amendments, see the recording of our webinar on 2025 Key Updates on State Privacy and AI Laws.
This article summarizes the OAG’s report and the positions the OAG takes on various issues. While the report highlights the OAG’s strong pro-consumer stance and illustrates the OAG’s expansive view of the CTDPA and its provisions, in breaking down the report, this article takes no position on the substance of those positions.
Key point: The law, which went into effect at signing, contains significant design and development requirements, requires independent third-party audits, and can be enforced against officers and employees.
On February 5, 2026, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster signed the South Carolina Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (H 3431). South Carolina now joins California, Maryland, Nebraska, and Vermont in enacting Age-Appropriate Design Code (AADC) laws although these laws vary widely in both scope and requirements.
South Carolina’s law has several unique requirements, including requiring covered online services to engage in independent third-party audits, which are to be publicly posted by the state attorney general. We review these requirements below.
Of further note, the law went into effect upon the governor’s signature and does not contain a right to cure. The law is generally enforceable by the state attorney general who can seek treble financial damages for violations. The law also specifically provides that officers and employees of covered online services can be held personally liable for willful and wanton violations. In addition, the law’s prohibition against dark patterns is enforceable under the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, which allows for a private right of action. In the below post, we provide an overview of the new law and provide more general context on its provisions.