NY AG: Retail Group Fails to State Claim in Challenge of Surveillance Pricing Law
New York AG Letitia James (D) asked a district court Tuesday to drop a challenge against a law requiring retailers to disclose when they're using algorithmic pricing. James argued the plaintiff -- the National Retail Federation (NRF) -- didn't state a claim in case 25-05500 and that the law doesn't violate the First Amendment.
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.
James noted the Algorithmic Disclosure Act doesn't stop the use of algorithmic pricing, but requires that companies "post a clear and conspicuous notice advising consumers that 'This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.'"
"The threadbare allegations in the Complaint fail to state a plausible claim," James continued. The NRF "merely alleges that [the law] does not align with its members’ preferred 'brand identity' and 'corporate messaging,'” nor does the complaint "come close to establishing that the disclosure requirement is unduly burdensome" or the basis for subjecting the statute to heightened scrutiny.
Filed in the U.S. District Court for Southern New York, the suit claims the government can't compel speech, even when it's a warning about surveillance pricing, which would violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Though the law was set to go into effect on July 8, the AG’s office said on July 14 it would delay enforcement until a federal court rules in this case (see 2507150052).
However, privacy lawyer Heidi Saas argued in a LinkedIn post that the First Amendment doesn't protect surveillance pricing, blasting what she called a "data broker meltdown" (see 2507070042).