Reed Smith LLP

On June 13, 2024, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) opened a 15 day public comment period (expiring June 28) for interested parties to comment on the State’s proposed changes to regulations that require additional information in future warnings on consumer products that contain chemicals linked to cancer or birth defects.


As Reed Smith has previously covered, an issue before the Supreme Court that could be decided this week could bring a seismic shift in the balance of power between agencies and courts, upend regulatory certainty, and open new opportunities for regulated industries, including health care. 

The Supreme Court’s pending decision in a pair of

On June 12, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) released new sanctions and export controls intended to further target Russia and Belarus, as well as those who transact with sanctioned entities and create diversion risks for export-controlled items.

New restrictions on certain IT and software services, effective

On 14 September 2022, as part of a suite of regulatory changes targeting cross-border supply chains, the European Commission presented its proposal for a Forced Labour Regulation.

In November 2023, the European Parliament adopted its position on the Commission’s proposal, followed by the Council of the EU adopting its General Approach in January 2024. After


On May 28, 2024, the U.S. Departments of Treasury, Agriculture, Energy, and White House representatives published a joint Policy Statement on voluntary carbon markets (VCMs). The Policy Statement sets out seven principles to guide engagement with VCMs, and the principles are designed to ensure that VCMs are effective, fair, and equitable, and instill market

To date, the UK government has adopted a “pro innovation” approach to AI regulation, refraining from legislation. This has been with a view to enable the UK to keep pace with rapid developments in AI.  However, this looks set to change with the recent publication of a first draft Artificial Intelligence (Regulation and Employment Rights)

On Monday, June 3, 2024, Attorney General Platkin and Director Sundeep Iyer of the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights (DCR) proposed a new rule (N.J.A.C. 13:16) that would clarify the legal standard and the burdens of proof for claims of disparate impact discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD). 

The standard does

The New Jersey Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Savage v. Township of Neptune, places limits on the enforceability of non-disparagement clauses in settlement agreements. The court unanimously held that such clauses are unenforceable if they prevent employees from discussing details related to claims of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment, aligning with protections under the New Jersey

On May 6, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a significant ruling in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc. (Case No. S279397). The decision provides much-needed clarity on California’s wage statement requirements and also held that employers can assert a good faith defense to wage statement claims under appropriate circumstances.

Labor Code section 226 states