The scope and intensity of these investigations remain fluid. New York's January 2026 letter to Instacart demanding documents on price experiments and partner pricing tools signals active discovery, but the full range of companies under scrutiny and the specific legal theories driving each investigation have not been fully disclosed. The relationship between state algorithmic-pricing enforcement and parallel federal antitrust review is also still taking shape.
Companies using personalized pricing or age-verification systems face immediate compliance exposure. State AGs are now operating on multiple enforcement tracks simultaneously—consumer fairness, minor protection, privacy, and algorithmic transparency—creating overlapping legal risk. In-house counsel should audit pricing tools and age-verification protocols against New York's disclosure requirements and California's emerging standards, and should anticipate document requests similar to the Instacart letter. The trend signals that algorithmic systems affecting price or access will be treated as a core enforcement priority as federal action stalls.