Free subscription to the Capitol Journal keeps you current on legislative and regulatory news.
Federal Government’s Penny Pinching Could Spur States to Set New Rounding Rules for Cash Sales Retailers are pushing for national rules to allow businesses to round cash sales to the nearest nickel...
OH Gov Vetoes Bill to Expand Youth Work Hours Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) vetoed a bill ( SB 50 ) that would have allowed 14- and 15-year-olds to work until 9 p.m. year-round. DeWine said in his veto message...
Trump to Issue National AI Rule President Donald Trump said he would issue an executive order this week establishing a single national rule for artificial intelligence, presumably preempting various...
A legacy of the #MeToo Movement has been an increased focus nationwide on pay transparency. Pay transparency laws are perhaps most often thought of as requirements that employers disclose compensation...
States Continue to Target AI-Driven Rental Pricing Nineteen states are considering bills that would limit the use of third-party software relying on competitor data to set rental housing prices, according...
* The views expressed in externally authored materials linked or published on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of LexisNexis Legal & Professional.
Tech industry groups including the Business Software Alliance, the Consumer Technology Association and the Chamber of Progress are stepping up their lobbying efforts in opposition to a slew of California bills aimed at regulating artificial intelligence as lawmakers in the state return from their summer recess. The industry appears to be faring well this year, with only about 120 of the over 1,000 AI-related bills introduced having been enacted. (PLURIBUS NEWS)
The U.S. Supreme Court denied a request from tech industry group NetChoice to temporarily block enforcement of a Mississippi law (HB 1126) requiring minors to obtain their parents’ consent before creating a social media account. Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a brief unsigned order stating that while he concurred with the court’s denial of NetChoice’s application for interim relief because the group had not sufficiently demonstrated that the balance of harms and equities favors it at this time,” the group had in his view “demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on the merits—namely, that enforcement of the Mississippi law would likely violate its members’ First Amendment rights.” (SCOTUS BLOG)
—Compiled by SNCJ Managing Editor KOREY CLARK
Visit our webpage to connect with a LexisNexis® State Net® representative and learn how the State Net legislative and regulatory tracking service can help you identify, track, analyze and report on relevant legislative and regulatory developments.