LathamTECH in Focus: How Should Crypto Companies Be Thinking About New Laws?
Regulatory Rollback: Impact on Industry of CFPB's Withdrawal of Fair Lending and UDAAP Informal Guidance — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Cannabis Law Now Podcast - The 4-1-1 on Cannabis Receiverships from a Top Cannabis Receiver
The LathamTECH Podcast — Where Digital Assets Slot Into a Shifting Fintech Regulatory Landscape: Insights From the US, UK, and EU
Podcast - New Guidance on Complying with FTC Rule on Deceptive and Unfair Fees
Tenant Tales and Reseller Realities: Inside the FCRA Arena With Eric Ellman — FCRA Focus Podcast
State AGs Unite: New Privacy Task Force Signals Shift in Regulatory Power Dynamics — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Podcast - Navigating the New Landscape of Private Equity in Healthcare
Compliance Tip of the Day: Podcasting for Compliance Training
Everything Compliance: Episode 154, The Law Firms in Trouble Edition
The fatal flaws in the 2023 CRA rule
Compliance Tip of the Day: Measuring Compliance Training Effectiveness
New Executive Order Targets Disparate Impact Claims Nationwide - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Welcoming a New Payment Pro: Jason Cover Joins the Payments Pros Podcast — Payments Pros – The Payments Law Podcast
Constangy Clips Ep. 10 - 3 Ways the GDPR Is Evolving with Today’s Tech Landscape
Medicaid Cuts: Potential Challenges and Legal Implications for Long-Term Care Facilities — Assisted Living and the Law Podcast
Rewriting the Rules: The Supreme Court's Landmark Decision on Clean Water Act Permits
Tariffs and Trade Series: What Boards of Directors Need to Know
Compliance Tip of the Day: Compliance Training Frequency
Under the Hood: Exploring the CFPB's 2025 Focus — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
On May 2, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a landmark ruling in California Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, Case No. 2:19-cv-02019, holding that Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) warning...more
Acrylamide, a Proposition 65-listed substance that naturally forms in the cooking and heating of many plant-based foods, has been the focus of court action over the past six years. However, companies will no longer be...more
Until this year, food companies—often the target of Proposition 65 enforcement actions—have been limited to specific “full-length” language for Prop 65 warnings, without explicit guidance regarding whether short-form warnings...more
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently amended its regulations concerning requirements for consumer product warnings to qualify for “safe harbor” protection from enforcement actions...more
California's Proposition 65 regulations are changing January 1, 2025. Proposition 65, enacted in November 1986, requires companies to provide clear and reasonable warnings to California consumers regarding exposures to...more
On December 6, 2024, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead California regulatory agency tasked with implementing California’s Proposition 65, issued a notice stating that the Office of...more
California’s proposed amendments to the Proposition 65 short-form warning requirements have been approved and are set to take effect on January 1, 2025. Businesses that use the current version of the short-form warning will...more
Exploring Trends in California’s Proposition 65: Claims, Chemicals, Products, and More - California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”), the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires, among other things,...more
Environmental Health Advocates v. Sream, Inc., (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 721 (Sream), and three other California appellate cases were subjects of a panel discussion on September 18, 2023 at the annual Proposition 65 Conference...more
California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”), the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires, among other things, sellers of products to provide a “clear and reasonable warning” if use of the product results...more
Exploring Trends in California’s Proposition 65: Claims, Chemicals, Products, and More California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”), the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires, among other things,...more
In a landmark decision, a California appellate court ruled that only "direct" exposures are subject to Proposition ("Prop") 65 warning requirements. EHA v. Sream, Inc. (Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two,...more
It has thus far been a noteworthy year for acrylamide, a Proposition 65-listed substance that naturally forms in the cooking and heating of many plant-based foods. Both the courts and the California Office of Environmental...more
On Friday, 16 April 2021, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead agency that implements California’s Proposition 65, proposed modified language for its new regulation on the warning...more
Companies with fewer than ten employees are exempt from California’s Proposition 65 warning requirements but may nonetheless have a sophisticated distribution network for their product, making them an attractive target for...more
Proposition 65 mandates that companies doing business in California provide warnings about exposures to chemicals listed as known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The California Office of Environmental...more
The old joke of “what do Philosophy majors ask at their first job?” takes on a new meaning in the world of Prop 65. On October 7, 2019, the California Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit in Federal court for the Eastern...more
LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS & STANDARDS - FDA Warns Company Selling CBD Oil - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has published a warning letter it sent in September 2019 to a company selling cannabidiol (CBD) oil as a...more
A lawsuit filed yesterday by the California Chamber of Commerce challenges the legality of Proposition 65 warnings on foods that contain acrylamide. The Complaint, which named the Attorney General of the State of California...more
As cannabis growers and retailers struggle with the complex and onerous regulatory scheme governing California’s emerging legal marijuana marketplace, they may be excused for overlooking the requirements of California Safe...more
In the last few weeks, Plaintiff John Devlin has initiated more than 50 Notices of Violation or “Threatened Violation” under California's Safe Drinking Harbor and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 ("Prop 65") alleging multiple...more
California Proposition 65 is often viewed as a significant thorn in the side of manufacturers. As previewed in our 2018 Corporate Compliance & Litigation Outlook, significant changes to California Prop 65 will be effective...more
All consumer products sold or distributed into the State of California may be subject to new chemical warning regulations that go into effect in three months....more