On July 14, 2025, the FTC announced its enforcement action against telemedicine company NextMed over charges it used misleading prices, fake reviews and deceptive weight-loss claims to sell GLP-1 weight-loss drugs. The FTC has now settled its charges that NextMed used deceptive practices to lure consumers into buying their weight-loss membership programs that had hidden terms and conditions. With the rise of both authentic and counterfeit GLP-1s throughout the nation and the proliferation of the availability of GLP-1s from telemedicine/telehealth companies, online pharmacies and medspas, this announcement is a sign that the federal government will actively monitor these entities to ensure consumers are getting genuine, authentic GLP-1s, that consumers are making informed decisions about weight-loss drugs, and that consumers are not being deceived and duped in the frenzy over GLP-1s.

Continue Reading FTC Uses Its Consumer Protection Powers to Regulate Sellers of GLP-1s

On July 8, 2025, the Eighth Circuit vacated the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) Negative Option Rule, also known as the Click-to-Cancel Rule, on procedural grounds. The Click-to-Cancel Rule, which provided a streamlined path for consumers to cancel subscription services in a few clicks of a mouse, was scheduled to take effect on July 14, 2025, but the Court found that the FTC had failed to follow mandatory procedural requirements.

Petitioners argued that the FTC had, in implementing the rule, exceeded its statutory authority, skipped a requisite preliminary regulatory analysis during the rulemaking process pursuant to Section 22 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), and acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) by enacting the Click-to-Cancel Rule. The Court agreed, finding that the FTC violated Section 22 of the FTC Act.

Continue Reading Eighth Circuit Cancels Click-to-Cancel

Just like the D.C. weather, the FTC’s docket was hot this past week. The agency (1) shared updates on settlements requiring refunds to consumers in a number of recent actions; (2) announced the reopening of its “Epic” settlement claim process; and (3) announced several new settlements the agency has reached in both the competition and consumer protection spaces; in some of these, the Commissioners issued statements, allowing readers a glimpse into the minds of the enforcers and decision makers themselves. These stories and more after the jump.

Continue Reading FTC Updates (June 23 – 27, 2025)

The FTC is heading into summer with an active docket. The agency has been keeping its eye on enforcement, issuing warning letters to contact lens prescribers over potential violations of the agency’s Contact Lens and Eyeglass Rules. Over the next few weeks, it plans on hosting a workshop on healthcare advertising and listening sessions on prescription drug pricing and competition. These stories, and more, after the jump. 

Continue Reading FTC Updates (May 26 – June 16, 2025)

Register now to join Stefan M. Meisner, Luke van Houwelingen, and Eric Fanchiang on June 4, 2025 from 12:00 pm EDT – 1:00 pm EDT as they discuss antitrust risks that can arise as companies grapple with whether and how to adjust their pricing to respond to tariffs being imposed around the world. The webinar is designed to give listeners an understanding of these potential risks, and best practices for companies to manage such risks and minimize scrutiny from antitrust regulators and potential litigants when developing their tariff responses.

Continue Reading Register Now! Antitrust Risks in A Trade War Webinar

This week, the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection has been busy addressing the “Attention Economy,” false income claims, privacy and data security, and a student debt relief scam. On the competition side, the FTC enforced against raising prices for anesthesiology services. These stories, and more, after the jump.

Continue Reading FTC Blog Updates May 19 – May 23, 2025

On April 21, 2025, the FTC filed an enforcement action against Uber alleging that Uber enrolled consumers in Uber One without proper consent, created substantial barriers to cancellation, and misrepresented the financial benefits of the subscription. The claims include violations of the FTC Act—which prohibits unfair and deceptive acts in commerce—and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (“ROSCA”)—which prohibits charging consumers for goods and services sold on the internet through a negative option (i.e., failing to cancel a subscription, unless the seller clearly discloses all material terms of the transaction before obtaining the consumer’s information and obtains the consumer’s expressed informed consent for the charges and provides simple mechanisms for the consumer to stop the recurring charges). Click here to continue reading.

Continue Reading Three-Clicks You’re Out? The FTC’s Action Against Uber Showcases That Businesses Need to Provide Transparent Cancellation Processes

The FTC has remained active in both the antitrust and consumer protection spaces. The agency is seeking public comment about federal regulations that could themselves be harming competition in the economy. The Commission also released data and statistics about common text message scams. And, of course, the agency’s landmark trial against Meta continues. More information on these stories after the jump.

Continue Reading FTC Updates (April 14 – 18, 2025)

On April 3, 2025, the United States Department of Justice’ Antitrust Division hosted a forum on “Big-Tech Censorship” in which key Trump Administration Officials announced their desire to reform, or entirely overhaul, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In March 2025, we wrote about the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) inquiry into “tech censorship” and