Tag Archives: Massachusetts Attorney General

Gun Rights Activists and Industry Representatives Continue to Challenge the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Gun Control Efforts

In the latest development in the ongoing dispute between Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, on the one hand, and gun manufacturers, distributors and gun rights advocates on the other, the Gun Owners’ Action League, Inc. (GOAL) and others filed suit last week challenging the constitutionality of both the Commonwealth’s assault weapons ban, which was first passed in 1998, and the AG’s July 20, 2016 Enforcement Notice,… More

Update: Six National Retailers Agree to Stop Using On-Call Shift Scheduling

Attorneys general from eight states, including Massachusetts and New York, and the District of Columbia, announced in December that six major retailers—Aeropostale, Carter’s, David’s Tea, Disney, PacSun, and Zumiez—have agreed to stop scheduling employees for on-call shifts.  The retailers agreed to end the practice after receiving letters from the AGs last April that sought information about the companies’ utilization of on-call shifts and expressed concern about the negative effects the practice has on employees. … More

Gun Manufacturers’ Lawsuits Challenge the Scope of the AG’s Authority Under Massachusetts’ Consumer Protection Statute

Stainless Steel Pistol Hand Gun 1911 45 ACPPetitions filed by Glock, Inc. and Remington Arms Company, LLC in Suffolk Superior Court in recent months will test the validity of a number of legal arguments that may be relied upon to set aside or limit the scope of Attorney General civil investigative demands in the Commonwealth. As we noted in an earlier post, G. L. c. 93A, § 6(1), Massachusetts’ unfair and deceptive practices statute,… More

Update: SJC Strongly Urges Plaintiffs to File Challenges to Ballot Initiatives by February 1

Voters ballot close-upAs we anticipated in an earlier post, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court provided clear guidance on the appropriate time to challenge ballot initiatives in two July 6 decisions. The opinions, both authored by Chief Justice Gants, strongly urge plaintiffs to bring challenges to ballot initiatives by February 1 in election years.

In Dunn v. Attorney General, the plaintiffs contested the Attorney General’s certification of a petition that would make it unlawful for farms to knowingly confine certain farm animals in a cruel manner and for businesses to knowingly sell certain products from animals that have been so confined.… More