Introduction

From autonomous-driving to ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems), to the potential for Artificial Intelligence (AI) to transform the aftermarket, AI is much-discussed as being transformational in the automotive sector; and there are numerous reported examples of AI being used already, for design, validation and performance management, connected with the manufacturing process.

However, automotive businesses developing, supplying and/or using AI tools now, or planning to do so in future, should be aware of emerging legislation that may impose mandatory legal obligations on parties involved in the AI system “life-cycle”.

Next Week: Tues. Dec. 23 at Noon—AgWorks: Staying Compliant with Anti-Discrimination Laws
National Agricultural Policy: USDA Announces $12 Billion in ‘Bridge Payments’
On December 8, 2025, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that the agency will distribute $12 billion in Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) funding for “one time bridge payments” to U.S. farmers

Seyfarth Synopsis: In MFA Enterprises, Inc. v. OSHRC, No. 24-3107 (8th Cir. 2025), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated OSHA citations related to hazards faced by employees working on top of rail cars, finding these hazards outside of OSHA’s statutory jurisdiction.

The Federal Railroad Administration (“FRA”) and federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”)

On December 9, 2025, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released a rulemaking package for its proposed “initial regulation” to implement California’s landmark climate disclosure laws: Senate Bill (SB) 253, requiring annual reporting of Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and SB 261, requiring the disclosure of climate-related financial risks. CARB also announced an in-person and virtual public hearing on the proposed rule to be held during the board’s regularly scheduled meeting on February 26, 2026.

California’s climate disclosure laws continue to present novel challenges and twists and turns to regulated businesses, and the past month is no exception. Since our last blog post on this topic, there have been significant developments regarding the implementation of SB 261 and SB 253. On November 18, 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals enjoined the California Air Resources Board (CARB) from enforcing SB 261, which requires companies to disclose climate-related financial risks. Importantly, the injunction was issued prior to the January 1 deadline for companies to publish their climate-related financial risk report pursuant to SB 261. On December 1, 2025, CARB issued an Enforcement Advisory confirming it would not enforce against companies for failure to post a climate-related financial risk report on January 1, 2026. Then, on December 9, 2025, CARB posted proposed regulations applicable to SB 253 and SB 261. Further details and considerations are discussed in this blog post.

On December 8, 2025, in the case of New York v. Trump, the federal district court for the District of Massachusetts vacated orders from several federal agencies that implemented a moratorium on permitting and approvals for wind energy projects in response to one of the current administration’s “day one” executive actions. The court vacated

This is the eighth in a series of blog posts discussing key features of Connecticut’s new release-based cleanup regulations (the “RBCRs”), R.C.S.A. § 22a-134tt-1 et seq. 

As remediation projects are planned and performed, the big question is: “How clean is clean enough?” This post discusses remediation standards under the RBCRs, and how those standards will

On December 5, 2025, Craig J. Pritzlaff, Acting Assistant Administrator of the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), issued an internal memorandum instituting a “Compliance First” approach, immediately effective for all civil enforcement and compliance activities. This memo claims to introduce a policy shift: prioritizing timely and effective compliance over punitive enforcement and