ARTICLE
7 May 2025

State AG News: Civil Rights, Diversity, Consumer Protection April 24-May 1, 2025

CM
Crowell & Moring LLP

Contributor

Our founders aspired to create a different kind of law firm when they launched Crowell & Moring in 1979. From those bold beginnings, our mission has been to provide our clients with the best services of any law firm in the world through a spirit of trust, respect, cooperation, collaboration, and a commitment to giving back to the communities around us.
Each week, Crowell & Moring's State Attorneys General team highlights significant actions that State AGs have taken. See our State Attorneys General page for more insights. Below are the updates from April 24 – May 1, 2025
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Each week, Crowell & Moring's State Attorneys General team highlights significant actions that State AGs have taken. See our State Attorneys General page for more insights. Below are the updates from April 24 – May 1, 2025

Multistate

  • A coalition of 21 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief supporting Susman Godfrey in its lawsuit challenging a Trump Administration Executive Order. Like EOs issued against other law firms, the challenged order requires federal officials to suspend active security clearances held by the firm's employees, to refuse to engage with or hire these individuals, and to deny them entry to federal buildings. The orders also directs federal contractors to disclose any business with the firm so that agencies can terminate contracts with the firm's clients.
  • A coalition of 19 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Education's efforts to withhold federal funding from state and local agencies unless they abandon diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts that the Trump Administration believes violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The coalition seeks to bar the Department from withholding funding based on this directive.

California

  • California Attorney General Bonta announced settlements with Clearwater Fine Foods USA Inc. (Clearwater), Seaquest Seafood Corporation (Seaquest), and Jayone Foods (Jayone), resolving allegations that the companies sold fresh or frozen seafood products in California with elevated levels of lead or cadmium without the warnings required for exposures to such contaminants, in violation of Proposition 65 and the California Unfair Competition Law. Clearwater must pay a total of $304,164.98 in civil penalties, attorneys' fees, and costs, and must implement heavy metal reduction measures. Seaquest and Jayone must pay a total of $81,440 in civil penalties, attorneys' fees, and costs, and must begin providing warnings.

Michigan

  • Michigan Attorney General Nessel filed a lawsuit against Roku, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging that the television platform violates the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Michigan Consumer Protection Act. The complaint alleges that Roku collected (and allowed third parties to collect) the personal information of children without the required notice and without obtaining parental consent.

New Hampshire

  • New Hampshire Attorney General Formella announced a settlement with Maxim Healthcare Services. The New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services determined that Maxim failed to adequately document its home health aide services and failed to correct this when ordered. As a result, Maxim must repay $28,269.50 to New Hampshire Healthy Families, plus an additional $100,000 penalty to the State. Maxim has also committed to improving its compliance by enhancing its electronic visit verification technology.

New Mexico

  • New Mexico Attorney General Torres announced that a New Mexico court denied a motion filed by Snap, Inc. to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the State. New Mexico alleges that Snapchat's design—including disappearing messages and unmoderated content discovery features—creates a dangerous environment that predators exploit to harm children.

Vermont

  • Vermont Attorney General Clark announced the refiling of a lawsuit against Clearview AI. The complaint, filed in Vermont Superior Court, Washington Civil Division, alleges that Clearview AI violates the Vermont Consumer Protection Act by using facial recognition technology to map the faces of Vermonters, including children, without their knowledge and selling access to this data.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More