Ashley Hoffman, California Chamber of Commerce Senior Policy Advocate, speaks at the California Retail Law Summit.
California regulation is a little like the tail wagging the dog — albeit a very big tail, given that California’s economy is the fourth largest in the world. What starts in California, whether it’s Extended Producer Responsibility laws, privacy regulation or workplace standards, often ends up in state legislatures and agencies across the country.
March 3-5, 2026 | Virtual Event
Your gateway to making a direct impact on legal strategies within your retail company. Register today!
That’s why, for the third year in a row, NRF partnered last week with the California Retailers Association to host our annual California Retail Law Summit. This year was the first time that more than a dozen California legislators and regulators came to engage in critical conversations with the retail representatives.
During keynote lunches, CalRecycle Director Zoe Heller answered questions about California’s suite of EPR laws and what would be required of “producers” of everything from textiles to packaging to mattresses, and several lawmakers discussed how their experience in the legal profession — both the private and public sectors — made them more able to diagnose and address public policy problems in a practical way.
Lawmakers and regulatory lawyers agreed that obligations caused by the successive passage of S.B. 54 (plastics and packaging EPR) and S.B. 707 (textiles EPR), as well as California’s new greenhouse gas reporting requirements, have caused enormous expense and created troubling unknowns for retailers doing business in California.
The discussion focused heavily on how to build and fund infrastructure at the local level to support the state’s goals of reducing landfill waste and reducing chemical exposure in the environment.
“Material has to go somewhere appropriate, or it’s going to fail,” one participant observed. Others acknowledged that the lack of a market for post-consumer materials poses a big challenge that California regulators will need to account for as various Producer Responsibility Organizations roll forward.
Trent Norris and Tom Boer, partners at Hogan Lovells, fleshed out retailers’ risks and obligations in the expanse of California environmental and chemical regulation. Although both S.B. 253 (greenhouse gas emissions reporting) and S.B. 261 (climate-related financial risk reporting) have been challenged in court, the suit against S.B. 261 failed, and the suit against S.B. 253 won’t be ripe again until the state issues filing regulations for that law. Meanwhile, reporting under S.B. 261 will begin in 2026.
Key proponents of regulating the use of algorithms for “personalized” or “dynamic” pricing in California discussed their goals and legislative priorities with the roomful of members.
While some lawmakers leaned into a purported consumer need for some modicum of transparency if prices are being set with personal data, others expressed broader concern for any kind of automated, machine-driven pricing. Those concerns stemmed from anecdotes about price-discrimination based on neighborhood (i.e., poorer neighborhoods with less competition get higher prices), the use of cellphone data such as battery charge to drive higher prices, and other stories that were generally categorized as “creepy.”
Target Director of Government Affairs Alex Randolph joins Assemblymembers Diane Papan and Nick Schultz at the California Retail Law Summit.
California did not pass a pricing bill this legislative session (although the state did pass a bill that bars the use of competitors’ data in algorithmic pricing). Nonetheless, pricing issues — whether that means reference pricing, the use of algorithms, “all-in” pricing requirements or any number of alleged labeling violations — have risen to the top of risks for retailers, according to Stephanie Sheridan and Meegan Brooks with the Benesch law firm.
These suits have risen more than 300% since 2023, and many have resulted in huge settlements. In California alone, 388 of the 495 pricing lawsuits across the nation have been filed. Mass arbitrations are on the rise as well, on top of demand letters from San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz district attorneys.
Sheridan and Brooks also flagged that a trend in Washington state is starting to bleed into California: lawsuits alleging that any subject line in an email that is even remotely misleading violates the state’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act.
A case in the Washington Supreme Court involved a subject line that said “Gah! This is the last chance to get up to 50% off!”; the defendant lost.
California Privacy Protection Agency Executive Director Tom Kemp and a panel of lawmakers expressed a desire to regulate data in a way that is easy for businesses to “operationalize.” Afterwards, retailers in the room — led by lawyers David Keating and Rachel Lowe from Alston & Bird, and Nick Godlove from Yum! Brands — emphasized that the latest trends in privacy regulation involve age-related issues.
Operationalizing kids’ privacy, as well as consent regimes for customers of all ages, requires lawyers’ granular focus on how signals are intercepted and how data flows through retailers’ systems. Regulators and plaintiffs lawyers are focusing on software development kit and data subject access request technologies; if data trails do not operate as they are intended to, those vulnerabilities will be exploited. Agentic commerce, which is just around the corner, is likely to compound data-tracing challenges.
Republican and Democratic lawmakers agreed that contact from constituents with real-world problems caused by California’s workforce regulations is critical to getting legislation right moving forward. Attendees emphasized that definitions need to be less vague and easier for regional enforcement officers to follow.
Emily Burkhardt Vicente and Kurt Larkin from Hunton Andrews Kurth, and Sarah Johnson, associate general counsel for Nordstrom, talked about the complex state of California’s labor and employment law. All eyes are on Assembly Bill 288, which allows the state’s Public Employment Relations Board to resolve private-sector labor disputes if federal coverage was lost or ceded — the legality of which is being challenged in federal court.
The change means that employers in California face increased scrutiny from state agencies. The panelists discussed the importance of practical strategies to head off labor problems before they start, including visiting stores, walking the floor to make sure that workplaces are safe and healthy, and incentivizing managers to engage frequently and meaningfully with employees.
This year was a big year for employee rights in California: The Freelance Worker Protection Act requires written contracts and timely payment for freelance workers, and provides avenues for civil action in case of violations. Additionally, Assembly Bill 1340 grants rideshare drivers the right to unionize and bargain over certain employment conditions, reflecting a broader trend toward expanding unionization rights for independent contractors.
These laws, combined with continued confusion around the interaction between arbitration and actions around the Private Attorneys General Act, continue to support the view that California has positioned itself as a leader in union-related issues and might further expand unionization rights for contractors in other industries.
Retailers are heavily focused on the onslaught of lawsuits brought under (at least) three different sections of the California Invasion of Privacy Act. These suits, in essence, allege that various website and app-based data analysis and processing technologies are tantamount to unauthorized interception or recording of consumer communications. Retail and other California business advocates are working hard to get legislation passed to curb the abuse of this outdated law.
Legal experts Goldi Mahdavi and Daniel Rockey of BCLP outlined key litigation defenses, such as lack of plaintiffs’ redressable harm, and practical complaince strategies like customer consent to try to make sense of the morass of CIPA lawsuits. The BCLP experts examined how AI is reshaping workplace practices and legal compliance in California, noting the rapid adoption of tools such as chatbots, automated resume screening, performance management systems and generative AI platforms.
As the country’s regulatory landscape continues to evolve with new laws, increased enforcement and emerging technologies, retailers and legal professionals must stay informed and proactive. The NRF Retail Law Summit, March 3-5, 2026, is a free virtual event for in-house attorneys, risk and compliance officers, HR professionals and legal counsels.
