Insights

Washington – September 17, 2024: The United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit recently adopted arguments put forward by Crowell & Moring lawyers in a case opposing an Iowa law that bans school officials from discussing gender identity or sexual orientation with students (its “Don’t Say Gay” provision) and requires the removal of certain books from Iowa public school libraries (its “Book Ban” provision).

Washington – April 30, 2024: Crowell & Moring’s Litigation Group recently filed two amicus briefs in the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in opposition to an Iowa law that bans school officials from discussing gender identity or sexual orientation with students (its “Don’t Say Gay” provision) and requires the removal of certain books from Iowa public school libraries (its “Book Ban” provision).

The rapid and evolving development of artificial intelligence (“AI”) has alarmed various government agencies, especially the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”).  On November 21, the FTC approved an omnibus resolution simplifying the process for its staff to issue civil investigative demands (“CIDs”) in AI investigations.  This resolution comes on the heels of President Biden’s October executive order establishing new standards for AI safety and security.  Both actions may increase exposure for businesses involved in the use of products and services that use or are produced through AI.  Businesses should be knowledgeable about their use and marketing of AI and ensure their products and conduct do not pose a risk to consumers or competition.

On April 13, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it has notified approximately 670 companies of potential FTC advertising regulation violations, triggering FTC authority to pursue steep civil penalties if companies fail to substantiate their product claims.  The target of this crusade is companies primarily advertising over-the-counter drugs, homeopathic products, dietary supplements, and functional foods.  Once on notice, companies could be subject to civil penalties of up to $50,120 per violation for unsubstantiated product claims.

The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) recently issued guidance recommending that the term “milk” extend beyond dairy (cow) milk products to plant-based alternatives. Although not legally binding, the guidance indicates that nondairy milk alternatives can be labeled “milk” and need not be restricted as nondairy “beverages” or “drinks.” These plant-based alternatives should, however, include a statement on their product label describing how they are nutritionally different from milk (e.g., “contains a lower amount of potassium than milk”).