Health Care & Reproductive Rights

62 local government agencies in California will receive $28.5 million to support efforts to reduce illegal tobacco sales to underage youth

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the recipients of the California Department of Justice (DOJ)’s Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Proposition 56 Tobacco Grant Program. The grant recipients are 62 local government agencies located throughout the state, including law enforcement agencies, prosecuting agencies, public health departments, cities, and counties. In total, they will receive $28.5 million to support their efforts to reduce illegal tobacco sales to underage youth. This year’s funding prioritized retail enforcement and education as part of Attorney General Bonta’s commitment to fighting the illegal sales and marketing of tobacco products to minors. Funded activities include "flavor ban" enforcement efforts, minor decoy operations, shoulder tap operations, prosecution, tobacco retail license inspections, retailer education programs, task force coordination, training for officers on tobacco laws and ordinances, monitoring retailer compliance, and more.

“The sale of tobacco products to underage youth remains a serious problem. For almost a decade, Proposition 56 has provided much-needed funding to address that challenge,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “The grant recipients we have selected this year are committed to both holding accountable those who break the law and ensuring a healthier, safer future for the next generation. I’m proud to support and partner with these local government agencies.” 

"The Fresno County Department of Public Health looks forward to working with the California Department of Justice to further protect the health and safety of our residents," said Joe Prado, Director, Fresno County Department of Public Health.

“Receiving the Tobacco Grant is an important step in strengthening our community’s commitment to protecting youth,” said Brian Stephens, Eureka Police Chief. “The Eureka Police Department is proud to partner with the California Department of Justice to ensure local retailers follow the law and prevent access to tobacco products by minors. This collaboration reinforces our dedication to education, compliance, and the long-term health of our community’s young people.” 

“Recognizing the dangers of tobacco use by children, the El Cajon Police Department is proud to partner with the California Department of Justice in accepting this grant,” said Jeremiah Larson, El Cajon Police Department Chief of Police. “This collaboration strengthens our commitment to preventing underage tobacco access and increasing awareness throughout our community and among local businesses.” 

“The City of Sacramento Code Enforcement Division is honored to be selected, through this highly competitive process, for 2025/26 California Department of Justice’s Tobacco Grant Program,” said Peter Lemos, Code and Housing Enforcement Chief, the City of Sacramento. “We sincerely thank the CA DOJ for reviewing and selecting our application, and for recognizing the need within our community. This funding will strengthen our ability to expand our tobacco enforcement efforts and enhance public health and safety within the City of Sacramento.”

“This grant is more than funding, it’s a commitment to protecting our neighborhoods,” said Jeremy Profitt, Police Support Manager, the City of Fairfield. “Through it, we will strengthen quality of life, reduce crime, and cut down on the flow of tobacco products that target our youth and underserved communities.”

“San Joaquin County Public Health Services is fortunate to receive this grant as an opportunity both to address the need to protect the community from illegal sales of commercial tobacco and to promote collaboration among our law enforcement agencies to create a meaningful impact on community safety and public health,” said Vince Nallas, Public Health Educator/Smoking & Tobacco Prevention Program (STOPP) Project Coordinator, San Joaquin County Public Health Services.

“I am honored to accept this award on behalf of the City of South El Monte. This recognition reflects our steadfast commitment to safeguarding the health and wellbeing of our residents, especially our youth. Preventing the sale of and accessibility to tobacco products in our community has been a priority and we will continue to advance policies that promote a healthier, safe future for all families,” said Gloria Olmos, Mayor of South El Monte. “I am grateful to our community partners, city staff, and colleagues who have supported these efforts. Together, we are creating a stronger more resilient South El Monte.”

“The City of Orange Code Enforcement Division is grateful and excited to receive its first tobacco grant, which will help prevent illegal sales to minors and reduce the availability of unlawful smoking devices and tobacco products,” said Rafael Perez, Code Compliance Manager, the City of Orange. 

Earlier this year, Attorney General Bonta reminded tobacco manufacturers and importers that, pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 3218 (Wood, 2024), the Attorney General’s Office is required to establish a Unflavored Tobacco List (UTL), a list of unflavored tobacco products that are lawful for sale in California. To be considered for the initial publication of the UTL, tobacco manufacturers and importers were required to submit completed applications by October 9, 2025. The Attorney General will publish the UTL by December 31, 2025.

Tobacco use is the number one preventable killer in the United States. Smoking-related illness accounts for approximately 40,000 deaths annually in California. Nicotine, a key component of cigarettes and most e-cigarettes, is highly addictive and harmful to the developing brains of children and young adults.

DOJ's Tobacco Grant Program aims to reduce childhood addiction to tobacco products by, among other things, supporting local partners that:

• Enforce the statewide retail flavor ban and similar local retail flavor ordinances.
• Prosecute and penalize retailers who violate statewide and local tobacco laws, including those who sell or market tobacco products to youth under the age of 21, including over the internet.
• Conduct retail inspections to ensure compliance.

The program is funded by Proposition 56, the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016. With this year’s awards, the Tobacco Grant Program has made over 540 grant awards and distributed over $240 million in funding to local agencies through a competitive process.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the City of New York today co-led a bipartisan coalition of 25 attorneys general in sending a letter to Shopify Inc. (Shopify), urging the company to take stronger action against merchants that use its services to sell illegal tobacco products, particularly e-cigarettes. Headquartered in Ottawa, Canada, Shopify describes itself as “a commerce platform that helps you sell online and in person” and explains that “[e]ntrepreneurs, retailers, and global brands use Shopify to make sales, run stores, and grow their businesses.” Shopify’s policies already prohibit merchants from using its services for unlawful activities, and Shopify has previously terminated e-cigarette sellers that were brought to the company’s attention by the California Attorney General’s Office. However, in today’s letter, the coalition argues that a more comprehensive solution is necessary because merchants continue to use Shopify’s services to sell illegal e-cigarettes. Accordingly, the coalition requests a meeting with Shopify to collaborate and exchange ideas on what a comprehensive solution could entail. 

“Right now, e-cigarettes are far too easy to purchase online. My fellow attorneys general and I have not hesitated to take action against individual sellers in the past, but we have found that many sellers are able to offer illegal e-cigarettes for purchase by using Shopify’s services. It’s unacceptable, and we’re urging Shopify to help us better tackle this public health threat,” said Attorney General Bonta. “By addressing unlawful e-cigarette sales at their point of origin, we can make progress faster and more effectively. Earlier this year, Shopify responded positively when my office reached out and asked for its cooperation in terminating its services to certain e-cigarette sellers. We hope Shopify continues to be a partner in our efforts to protect public health and enforce federal, state, and local laws.”  

In today’s letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition:

• Identify 29 illegal e-cigarette websites that are currently hosted on Shopify’s platform. California recently placed these websites on notice for operating in violation of federal and state laws. This list is not exhaustive.
• Enclose an exhibit identifying over 200 additional websites known to sell illegal tobacco products. This list is not exhaustive.
• Write that they would undertake some of the effort needed to further identify illegal sellers to Shopify, if Shopify and the coalition entered into a cooperative agreement. 

E-cigarettes are highly addictive and pose significant health risks, particularly to youth and are therefore subject to strict regulation. States in the coalition, as well as local governments within the states, have passed laws to mitigate the sale of e-cigarettes. For example, in California, Senate Bill 793 (Hill, 2020) banned flavored tobacco products (subject to certain exceptions) and tobacco product flavor enhancers. Assembly Bill 3218 (Wood, 2024), which went into effect on January 1, 2025, amended the flavor ban by expanding the definition of flavored products, expanding enforcement power, and creating an Unflavored Tobacco List (UTL). The UTL is a list of unflavored tobacco products that are lawful for sale in California. The Attorney General will publish the UTL by December 31, 2025. 

At the federal level, every new tobacco product, such as an e-cigarette, must receive an order from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorizing its marketing and sale in the United States. To date, the FDA has approved only 39 e-cigarette products, none in any flavor other than tobacco and menthol. E-cigarettes that have not received approval from the FDA, which constitute essentially all e-cigarettes offered by online sellers, are deemed “adulterated.” Federal law prohibits the receipt or delivery in interstate commerce of any adulterated tobacco product, and delivery or proffered delivery of adulterated tobacco products is accordingly unlawful under United States law.

Attorney General Bonta has also filed actions against individual e-cigarette sellers. Earlier this year, he announced coordinated multistate actions to hold companies accountable for unlawfully manufacturing, distributing, selling, and marketing flavored disposable e-cigarette products. He also announced a lawsuit against Flumgio Technology Inc., Berkeley Int'l Business Crew, and their founder, Mr. Zaoyu Zhu for importing and selling the popular FLUM brand e-cigarettes. In addition, in 2023, he announced lawsuits against two California online retailers of e-cigarettes, Ejuicesteals and E-juice Vapor, Inc. And Attorney General Bonta secured a $462 million multistate settlement agreement with electronic cigarette maker, JUUL, Labs, Inc. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta and the City of New York in sending today’s letter to Shopify are the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued a consumer alert reminding consumers, healthcare providers, and credit reporting agencies that in California it remains illegal for medical debt to appear on credit reports. Recently, the Trump Administration’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an interpretive rule claiming that federal law generally preempts state medical debt laws — it does not. 

“In California, it is illegal for medical debt to appear on your credit report. Medical debt — which the law generally defines as debt owed to a provider of medical services, products, or devices — is generally unforeseen; it is not a reliable predictor of credit risk and can make it harder for people who are already struggling to secure housing, a job, or a car to get to work," said Attorney General Bonta. "California banned medical debt from appearing on credit reports because we recognized this practice as harmful to struggling consumers and not helpful in determining creditworthiness. Let me be clear: This remains the law in California. I urge consumers to understand their rights and to regularly check their credit reports to ensure medical debt does not make an appearance. The California Department of Justice is committed to protecting and enforcing all of California's laws — including this one.”

California’s Law

Senate Bill 1061 (SB 1061), authored by Senator Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara) and sponsored by Attorney General Bonta, went into effect on January 1, 2025, and protects consumers from having their credit ruined by medical debt appearing on credit reports. 

Nationally, medical debt continues to rise, creating significant barriers to employment, housing, and equitable access to healthcare. People with medical debt are more likely than those with student loans or credit card debt to report being denied a rental or mortgage, increasing their risk of homelessness or forcing them into substandard housing. Medical debt can hinder employment opportunities, as employers often rely on credit reports in hiring decisions, further complicating efforts to repay the debt. Many consumers also delay essential medical care due to financial burdens, which can result in worsening health conditions.  

Monitoring Your Credit Report 

The best way to ensure medical debt has not appeared on your credit report is by regularly checking your credit report for inaccuracies or changes. Consumers are entitled to one free credit report per year from each of the three national credit bureaus. Those bureaus are Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. You have the option of requesting all three reports at once or staggering them. Checking your credit reports at least once a year is a good way to discover errors, like the inclusion of medical debt or even identity theft. These errors could raise your cost of credit or cut you off from credit. The sooner these errors are discovered, the easier they are to clear up.  

You can order your free annual credit reports through a toll-free phone number (1-877-322-8228), online, at www.annualcreditreport.com/cra/index.jsp, or by mailing the order form here to the following address: 

Annual Credit Report Request Service
P. O. Box 105281
Atlanta, GA 30348-5281

For more information on how to order, read, and correct your credit report, please visit here. 

If You Find Medical Debt on Your Credit Report 

If consumers find medical debt on their credit report, they should notify the medical provider’s office, debt holder, and credit agency to allow them an opportunity to quickly remove the information from their credit report. If the issue persists after providing notice to the medical provider, debt holder or credit bureau, consumers may consider consulting a private attorney or legal aid.

Consumers who find medical debt on their credit report can also file a complaint with the California Department of Justice at oag.ca.gov/report.

Joins multistate coalition opposing U.S. DOJ subpoena to access private medical records

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced joining a coalition of 15 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The brief urges the court to limit the U.S. Department of Justice’s (U.S. DOJ) subpoena targeting the release of private medical records, including patient records, related to gender-affirming care at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP).

“Subpoenas targeting the medical records of transgender youth are an assault on privacy,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Healthcare decisions should be between patients, families, and doctors — not in the hands of the government. That’s why I am standing with a coalition of attorneys general, urging the court to quash or limit U.S. DOJ’s subpoena of documents relating to medically necessary, gender-affirming care.”

Since taking office, the Trump Administration has attempted to end lawful medical care that it disfavors. On day one, President Trump issued an Executive Order declaring gender identity a “false” idea. A week later, the President issued another Executive Order attempting to strip federal funding from institutions that provide lifesaving gender-affirming care for young people under the age of 19, with the ultimate goal of ending all gender-affirming care for adolescents. In April, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo directing U.S. DOJ to investigate healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies that engage in gender-affirming care. 

On June 12, U.S. DOJ sent CHOP an administrative subpoena, seeking information and documents relating to the hospital’s provision of gender-affirming care. This subpoena demands sensitive medical records and personally identifying information about adolescent patients and their families. For example, U.S. DOJ is seeking patient names, dates of birth, home addresses, and social security numbers. 

In their brief, the attorneys general urge the court to limit U.S. DOJ’s subpoena. They argue that:

• The federal government is clearly seeking to intimidate medical providers from offering critical and medically necessary care to transgender youth, even in states like California where such care is legal and protected.
• As part of this subpoena request, U.S. DOJ is interpreting the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) as outlawing medical providers from prescribing FDA approved medications to their patients for off label use. If U.S. DOJ’s interpretation of the FDCA were accepted, entire fields of medicine could see their practitioners at risk of criminal conviction merely for offering routine, evidence-based treatments. As the amicus brief points out, some studies estimate that as much as 80% of drugs prescribed for children are prescribed for off label uses. 

The states submitting the brief have enacted their own laws, policies, and protections, for transgender residents, including transgender youth under the age of 19. California has enacted laws recognizing the right to access gender-affirming care and shielding people who access or provide gender-affirming care from civil or criminal penalties by out-of-state jurisdictions. 

Earlier this month, Attorney General Bonta filed an amicus brief opposing U.S. DOJ’s subpoena for patient records related to gender affirming care at Boston Children’s Hospital. California continues its efforts to stand firmly in support of healthcare policies that respect the dignity and rights of all people.

Joining Attorney General Bonta in submitting the amicus brief are the attorneys general of Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. 

A copy of the amicus brief can be found here.

Records sought by U.S. DOJ are outrageously expansive, seek to intimidate those providing and receiving gender-affirming care 

U.S. DOJ subpoena includes unprecedented interpretation of federal law that could expose doctors to criminal liability for offering evidence-based treatments

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced joining a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The brief opposes the Trump Administration’s motion to reconsider the court’s ruling quashing in its entirety the U.S. Department of Justice’s (U.S. DOJ) subpoena for documents, including patient records, related to gender affirming care at Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH). 

“From President Trump to the U.S. Department of Justice, the entirety of the federal government is attacking gender-affirming care — even in states, like California, that support the rights of transgender youth to live their lives as their authentic selves,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We will not bow down to any of those unlawful actions, no matter where they are happening. We are asking the federal district court in Massachusetts to, once again, reject the Trump Administration’s subpoena seeking information related to gender affirming care. The records sought by the U.S. Department of Justice are outrageously expansive and seek to intimidate those providing and receiving gender-affirming care.” 

Since taking office, the Trump Administration has attempted to end lawful medical care that it disfavors. On day one, President Trump issued an Executive Order declaring gender identity a “false” idea. A week later, the President issued another Executive Order attempting to strip federal funding from institutions that provide lifesaving gender-affirming care for young people under the age of 19, with the ultimate goal of ending all gender-affirming care for adolescents. In April, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo directing U.S. DOJ to investigate healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies that engage in gender affirming care.

On June 11, U.S. DOJ sent BCH an administrative subpoena, seeking information and documents relating to the hospital’s provision of gender-affirming care. This subpoena sought a broad range of highly sensitive and confidential records related to both patients and providers. For example, U.S. DOJ is seeking personnel records for nearly all BCH employees and extensive patient records, such as their social security numbers and home addresses.

On September 9, a federal judge voided U.S. DOJ’s subpoena in its entirety, ruling that it was clearly an attempt to interfere with Massachusetts’s right to protect gender-affirming care within its borders and to intimidate BCH and its patients from providing and seeking gender-affirming care. The Trump Administration has now filed a motion for the Court to set aside its ruling.

In their brief, the attorneys general urge the court to uphold its prior ruling quashing U.S. DOJ’s subpoena. They argue that:

• The federal government is clearly seeking to intimidate medical providers from offering critical and medically necessary care to transgender youth, even in states like California where such care is legal and protected.
• As part of this subpoena request, for the first time ever, U.S. DOJ is interpreting the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) as outlawing medical providers from prescribing FDA approved medications to their patients for off label use. If U.S. DOJ’s interpretation of the FDCA were accepted, entire fields of medicine could see their practitioners at risk of criminal conviction merely for offering routine, evidence-based treatments. As the amicus brief points out, some studies estimate that as much as 80% of drugs prescribed for children are prescribed for off-label uses. 

The states submitting today’s brief have enacted their own laws, policies, and protections for transgender residents, including transgender youth under the age of 19. California has enacted laws recognizing the right to access gender-affirming care and shielding people who access or provide gender-affirming care from civil or criminal penalties by out-of-state jurisdictions. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta in submitting the amicus brief are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the amicus brief can be foud here. 

OAKLAND — Co-leading a coalition of 22 attorneys general and the state of Pennsylvania, California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to block the Trump Administration from enforcing the “Defund Provision” within the recently enacted federal budget bill (“Big Beautiful Bill”). The Defund Provision excludes certain health centers, including Planned Parenthood health centers, from receiving federal Medicaid reimbursements. Among other things, these centers provide essential healthcare services to low-income patients, such as cancer screenings, testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and birth control. After filing suit over the Defund Provision on July 29, 2025, the coalition is now asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to grant its motion for a preliminary injunction because the States are likely to succeed on the merits, the Defund Provision would result in irreparable harm to the States if allowed to stay in effect, and the balance of equities and the public interest favor the States. In a related lawsuit, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Kennedy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an unpublished order on September 11, 2025 granting the Trump Administration’s request to allow the Defund Provision to go into effect. 

“For years and years, the attacks on Planned Parenthood have been relentless. With the Defund Provision in President Trump’s so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ those attacks have escalated to an all-out assault. Let me be clear: Our coalition’s support for Planned Parenthood and other health centers providing essential reproductive healthcare is resolute,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “We are asking the court to grant our motion for a preliminary injunction because the stakes have never been higher. These centers provide critical healthcare services for low-income patients across the country — our states, and the health of our people, will suffer immensely if the Defund Provision is allowed to remain in effect.” 

“Right now, access to abortion and reproductive health care in California hangs in the balance. All 109 Planned Parenthood health centers in California are currently prohibited from being reimbursed for any of the services they provide to patients on Medi-Cal. As a trusted provider in the Medi-Cal program, Planned Parenthood health centers continue to provide care to these patients, but given over 80% of Planned Parenthood patients in California are Medi-Cal enrollees, this is unsustainable and greatly jeopardizes sexual and reproductive health care access in the state,” said Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California CEO and President Jodi Hicks. “If the Defund Provision remains in effect, Planned Parenthood health centers in California will be forced to reduce services, scale back hours, or close their doors — cutting off access to live-saving health care services for our most vulnerable communities. As we continue to weather these attacks by the Trump Administration, PPAC is grateful to California Attorney General Rob Bonta and other state attorneys general for their ongoing efforts to halt this devastating federal defund and ensure people can continue to access the essential health care they need and deserve, including at Planned Parenthood health centers.” 

The coalition’s lawsuit alleges that the Defund Provision violates the U.S. Constitution’s Spending Clause due to the lack of clear notice and the inclusion of unconstitutional provisions. Specifically, it is evident that Planned Parenthood health centers are the clear target of the Defund Provision, but Congress failed to adequately define (1) the full scope of providers that qualify as “prohibited entities” and (2) the timing of the prohibition on federal reimbursements to such entities. Moreover, the Defund Provision constitutes a change that the States could not have anticipated when joining Medicaid. Throughout the sixty-year history of Medicaid, States — not the federal government — have determined whether providers “qualify” for the Medicaid program.  

In its motion for a preliminary injunction, the coalition underscores that:

• The Defund Provision is already impacting the States through increased administrative burdens and compliance costs. For example, the States have had to restructure their claims-processing infrastructure to try to accommodate the Defund Provision’s requirements.  
• The Defund Provision’s ambiguity has resulted in the States having to field questions from providers and draft guidance in an attempt to address the ambiguities.  
• The Defund Provision will also result in significant increases in the States’ healthcare expenses. For example, treatment for later-stage breast and cervical cancer is much more expensive than screenings and early or preventative treatment. Further, Planned Parenthood treats a high volume of patients, and other healthcare centers not targeted by the Defund Provision will not be able to absorb the influx of patients. 

In filing the motion for a preliminary injunction, Attorney General Bonta — along with the attorneys general of Connecticut and New York — lead the attorneys general of Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as the state of Pennsylvania. 

A copy of the motion for a preliminary injunction can be found here. In support of its motion for a preliminary injunction, the coalition also submitted a declaration from Megan L. Kavanaugh, Principal Research Scientist at the Guttmacher Institute. That declaration can be found here.

Tobacco products not appearing on Unflavored Tobacco List will be ineligible for sale in California

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today reminded tobacco manufacturers and importers that, pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 3218 (Wood, 2024), the Attorney General’s Office is required to establish a Unflavored Tobacco List (UTL), a list of unflavored tobacco products that are lawful for sale in California. Any covered tobacco product not appearing on the UTL will be deemed a flavored tobacco product and ineligible for sale. To be considered for the initial publication of the UTL, tobacco manufacturers and importers must submit completed applications by Thursday, October 9, 2025. The UTL Portal, where applicants may create accounts and submit applications, is available at utl.doj.ca.gov. Sponsored by Attorney General Bonta, AB 3218 provides that the UTL must be published by December 31, 2025.

“In California, we have not, and will not, waver in protecting the health of our people — especially our youth. Critical to those efforts will be the Unflavored Tobacco List that my office is charged with publishing and maintaining,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This list provides much-needed transparency about the unflavored tobacco products that can be legally sold in our state. I encourage tobacco manufacturers and importers to submit their applications for inclusion in the Unflavored Tobacco List as soon as possible. The October 9 deadline is just around the corner.” 

In 2020, Senate Bill 793 (Hill, 2020) banned flavored tobacco products (subject to certain exceptions) and tobacco product flavor enhancers in California. AB 3218, which went into effect on January 1, 2025, amended the flavor ban by expanding the definition of flavored products, expanding enforcement power, and creating the UTL. The Attorney General’s Office issued emergency regulations to implement AB 3218, in part, by describing how tobacco manufacturers and importers of unflavored tobacco products may apply for the placement of their products on the UTL and what information those manufacturers and importers must provide. The regulations also establish fees for initial and renewed placement on the list, and describe how civil penalties against distributors, wholesalers, and delivery sellers of products not appearing on the UTL may be assessed and appealed.

Any eligible tobacco manufacturer or importer may appoint authorized agents to prepare product forms and make submissions on their behalf. Applications for the list submitted by October 9, 2025 will be considered for that initial list and will receive a response — whether that is an approval, denial, or request for additional information, before the list goes live. Applications are complete and will be considered for the initial list if, by October 9, 2025, a manufacturer or importer creates an account, fills out information regarding products through product or variant form(s), completes UTL application(s), submits payment that the Attorney General’s Office receives, and samples are postmarked. 

Questions regarding registration and submissions can be directed to UTLInbox@doj.ca.gov.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell today co-led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in submitting a comment letter opposing the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) proposed federal rule that would eliminate veterans’ and their families’ access to abortion care. In 2022, the Biden Administration implemented the “Reproductive Health Services” Rule (the Rule), which currently allows veterans and their survivors and dependents to access abortion services at VA health care centers in situations where the patient’s life or health is threatened and in cases of self-reported rape or incest. The Rule also permits veterans and their survivors and dependents to access abortion counseling at VA health centers. After the Trump Administration indicated it was reviewing the Rule and held meetings with other stakeholders on the Rule, a coalition of attorneys general — including the Office of Attorney General Bonta — met with VA officials and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on April 8, 2025 to express why rolling back the Rule would cause harm to veterans and their families. On August 4, 2025, the Trump Administration published a proposed rule to formally undo the Biden Administration’s Rule. The comment letter is submitted in response to the VA’s invitation for public comment.  

“Earlier this year, my fellow attorneys general and I urged the Trump Administration to protect access to abortion care for veterans and their families in cases of rape, incest, and when the life or health of the woman is at risk. We also urged the Trump Administration to protect access to abortion counseling. Despite our commonsense positions, the Trump Administration has decided to continue its relentless attacks on reproductive healthcare,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As I have said before, medical decisions should be made by patients and their doctors — free from political interference. I’m proud to be co-leading my fellow attorneys general in calling on the Trump Administration to withdraw its proposed rule, which is both extreme and unjustified by any legal rationale.” 

On September 2, 2022, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, the Biden Administration’s VA announced the interim version of the Rule. On October 11, 2022, Attorney General Bonta led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a comment letter supporting the VA’s efforts to increase reproductive freedom. After receiving public comment, the VA finalized the Rule on March 4, 2024. Since the Dobbs decision, at least 19 states have banned or restricted abortion care, while others are still proposing new restrictions.  

In the letter, the attorneys general write that: 

• The proposed rule presents an unclear standard as to when, if at all, VA physicians can provide abortion care. Specifically, the proposed rule’s preamble insists that it will allow VA physicians to provide lifesaving care — in circumstances “when a physician certifies that the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term” — while the proposed regulatory text bans abortion care for veterans entirely. Generally, where there is a discrepancy between the preamble and the regulatory text, the regulatory text controls. In addition, to the extent that the VA carves out an exception for the lives of pregnant survivors and dependents, it fails to set out a process by which individuals may take advantage of the exception.
• The proposed rule is extreme in its formulation and is out of step with existing abortion exceptions on the state and federal level. Although exceptions themselves are problematic and often difficult to administer, the VA’s proposed changes would mark a substantial and inhumane departure from decades of policy protecting the health and lives of pregnant patients and the autonomy of pregnant patients who have experienced rape and incest.
• The proposed rule is inadequately justified. It falsely claims that the VA does not have legal authority to provide abortion care, obfuscates other federal abortion policy in order to establish congressional intent for a VA abortion ban where there is none, and relies on political considerations instead of medical ones. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta in sending the comment letter are the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia. 

A copy of the comment letter can be found here.

Under settlement, new owner — Sycamore Partners Management, L.P. — must use best efforts to continue operating Walgreens stores throughout California, including Bakersfield, Fresno, Huntington Beach, Los Angeles, Modesto, Riverside, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, and Stockton 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced a settlement with Walgreens Co. (Walgreens) and its succeeding owner, Sycamore Partners Management, L.P. (Sycamore), that would operate as an injunction and protect competition, patients, and pharmacy-related workers. Earlier this year, on March 6, 2025, Walgreens announced that it agreed to be acquired by private equity firm, Sycamore. The proposed transaction, which involves over 450 California Walgreens stores, has the potential to increase pharmacy deserts in California — with disproportionate impacts on workers and patients of Walgreens. Walgreens patients include low-income individuals, elderly individuals, individuals who live in rural areas, and people of color. The settlement was reached under Assembly Bill 853 (AB 853), which requires notice and review by the Attorney General of transactions involving retail pharmacies and grocery stores in order to assess impact on access and labor. AB 853 was authored by former Assemblymember Brian Maienschein (D-San Diego) and went into effect on October 8, 2023. The settlement is subject to court approval.

“The settlement we have reached with Walgreens and Sycamore is good news for Californians. At its core, it ensures that the California Walgreens stores remain open and continue providing vital services in our communities,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Across the country, pharmacies are closing in alarming numbers. Thanks to AB 853, my office has the power to address the competition harms posed by transactions involving retail pharmacies and grocery stores, and we are not letting that authority go unused.”

Walgreens is the last nationwide and statewide independent pharmacy chain — that is, a chain not owned by one of the Big Three Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs), which are CVS Caremark, Optum Rx, and Express Scripts. The proposed transaction between Walgreens and Sycamore includes, but is not limited to, the following Walgreens stores in California: six in Bakersfield, 11 in Fresno, five in Huntington Beach, 13 in Los Angeles, eight in Modesto, five in Riverside, seven in Sacramento, seven in San Diego, 26 in San Francisco, 10 in San Jose, and seven in Stockton.

Under the settlement, Walgreens and Sycamore agree to the following conditions for the next seven years: 

• Use best efforts to maintain all California Walgreens stores remaining as of the date of the agreement, as well as all required licenses.
• Provide 90-day notice of sale or closure of any remaining Walgreens stores.
• Prohibition from reselling any of the Walgreens stores in California to any of the Big Three PBMs.
• Prohibition from using any dividend recapitalization or other distribution of profits where such a dividend recapitalization or other distribution of profits would reasonably be likely to materially impair the operations of Walgreens.
• Use best efforts to continue participation in Medi-Cal and Medicare.
• Use best efforts to provide financial assistance to patients.
• Ensure best efforts regarding compliance with state staffing levels.
• Maintain a hiring list for all employees from stores that close going forward for preferential hiring at other Walgreens stores.
• Use commercially reasonable efforts to pay retirement contributions if collective bargaining agreements require such payments.
• Use commercially reasonable efforts to abstain from contesting unemployment for individuals who are laid off as a result of the sale or closure of Walgreens stores if no nearby Walgreens store offers employment.
• Use commercially reasonable efforts to bargain with any unions in good faith.
• Comply with nondiscrimination rules in the provision of healthcare services.

Today’s settlement is the second reached by Attorney General Bonta under AB 853. The first settlement was with Rite Aid and was announced by Attorney General Bonta on August 19, 2024. In addition, on April 14, 2025, Attorney General Bonta joined a bipartisan coalition of 39 attorneys general in urging the leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate to enact a law that prohibits PBMs, their parent companies, or affiliates from owning or operating pharmacies. Created in the late 1960s to process claims for drug companies, PBMs were supposed to help consumers access low-cost pharmaceutical care through negotiated volume-pricing discounts, generic substitution, manufacturer rebates, and other tools. However, PBMs have overtaken the market and now wield outsized power to reap massive profits at the expense of consumers and local community pharmacies.

The California Department of Justice’s Healthcare Rights and Access Section (HRA) works proactively to increase and protect the affordability, accessibility, and quality of healthcare in California. HRA’s attorneys monitor and contribute to various areas of the Attorney General’s healthcare work, including nonprofit healthcare transactions; consumer rights; anticompetitive consolidation in the healthcare market; anticompetitive drug pricing; privacy issues; civil rights, such as reproductive rights and LGBTQ+ healthcare-related rights; and public health work on tobacco, e-cigarettes, and other products. 

A copy of the settlement documents can be found here.

Providence St. Joseph Hospital seeking to skirt state law, deny women emergency abortion care

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a statement ahead of tomorrow’s hearing in People of the State of California v. St. Joseph Health Northern California. On September 30, 2024, Attorney General Bonta filed a lawsuit in Humboldt County Superior Court alleging that Providence St. Joseph Hospital (Providence) in Eureka, California violated multiple laws — including California’s Emergency Services Law, the state level analogue to the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), and the Unruh Civil Rights Act — by refusing to provide emergency abortion care when needed to save the life and health of patients. On October 29, 2024, he secured a voluntary stipulation from Providence, in which it agreed to provide access to emergency abortion care. That same day, the court signed an accompanying order, requiring Providence to abide by the terms of the stipulation. On June 5, 2025, Attorney General Bonta filed a motion to enforce the stipulation and order due to Providence’s attempt to modify or dissolve altogether the stipulation, which will be the focus of tomorrow’s hearing. 

“Providence is attempting to go back on its word. It agreed to provide emergency abortion care, yet it is now asking the court to allow it to reverse course. This is not only disappointing, it's troubling: It stands to put the women of Humboldt County back in harm’s way,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My team and I look forward to tomorrow’s hearing. We firmly believe that Providence is in the wrong. Earlier this year, we successfully blocked Providence’s meritless attempt to dismiss our lawsuit, and I am confident that we will prevail again. Whether the attacks are coming from the Trump Administration or from within our state, I am committed to doing everything in my power to ensure that California remains a safe haven for those seeking essential reproductive healthcare.”  

Providence is currently the only available option for women in Humboldt County to seek emergency abortion care. Providence’s effort to modify or dissolve the stipulation escalates a deeply concerning position: that the stipulation and order do not mean what they plainly state and that Providence does not have to fully comply with them. 

If you were denied an abortion you needed in a medical emergency, or if you were denied any other emergency medical care, you can contact abortion.access@doj.ca.gov. Attorney General Bonta also recently announced the launch of a statewide survey to assess how hospital emergency departments are following emergency reproductive healthcare laws. Results from the survey will inform oversight, guide enforcement efforts, and ensure hospitals are fully complying with California’s Emergency Services Law.

A copy of Attorney General Bonta’s latest filing — a consolidated brief that supports his motion to enforce and opposes Providence’s effort to modify or dissolve the stipulation — can be found here.

The hearing is scheduled to begin in Humboldt County Superior Court's Department 4 at 10:30 AM PT tomorrow, and will be accessible virtually here.