NJ Privacy Rules May Require Companies to Reassess Data, Redesign Websites: Lawyers
Attorney general draft regulations aim “to stretch the boundaries of the New Jersey Data Privacy Act (NJDPA) -- so much so, in fact, that you should not assume your existing compliance programs would fully satisfy these proposed requirements,” Fisher Phillips attorneys blogged Thursday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
Comments are due Aug. 1 on the draft rules, which were released last month (see 2506020034) by the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs. Several law firms have warned that the proposed regulations contain unusual requirements (see 2506170037). The attorney general’s office has said it expects to adopt final rules in 2026.
“They include detailed standards for obtaining consumer consent, specific content and timing requirements for loyalty program notices, expanded definitions of personal and sensitive data, and new restrictions on the use of data for AI model training,” wrote the Fisher Phillips lawyers.
“Businesses that are currently subject to other state privacy laws … will need to reassess their data inventories and classification practices to ensure they capture additional categories that would be considered personal or sensitive under the proposed NJDPA regulations should they take effect as proposed,” they said. “These include mother’s maiden name, place and date of birth, unique device identifiers, and identifying information related to social media accounts.”
Companies might also need to “redesign their websites to ensure that cookie consent mechanisms such as cookie banners are accessible and present choices with symmetry,” the lawyers added. “You’ll want to avoid designs that nudge or pressure consumers into consenting to data uses beyond what is reasonably necessary.”