Careers

Diversity

With 18 offices, from New York to Los Angeles and Seattle to Orlando, we live and work in communities all over the U.S., collaborating across locations, disciplines and even borders. Our experienced, highly ranked lawyers serve businesses wherever they are and wherever they want to go.

Offices

About Us

Pages

Professionals

Thought leadership: blogs, podcasts, videos, publications, events and news

Insights

Services

Pro Bono

Am Law 100 firm with practices in Business, Digital Assets and Data Management, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation and Tax.

Home | BakerHostetler

A ‘Patent’ Lack of Transparency and Good Faith: District Courts’ Inherent Authority to Police Party Conduct (The Legal Intelligencer)

Methods To Allocate Tariff-Related Risks in M&A Agreements

AD Nauseam

AD Nauseam: Survey Says: The Consumer Perception Study Series Pt. 1

James Sherer Moderates, Jennifer Negron Presents on Insights from Legalweek 2025 for ACEDS New York Metro Chapter

On March 24, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin approved SB 754, titled “Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices, etc., reproductive or sexual health information.”

core/paragraph

SB 754 is the latest state-level legislative move to regulate consumer health data, but with a twist – this amendment modifies Virginia’s Consumer Protection Act (the Act), not the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (VCDPA). SB 754 amends the Act to prohibit as a fraudulent act or practice any “supplier” in connection with a “consumer transaction” from “[o]btaining, disclosing, selling, or disseminating any personally identifiable reproductive or sexual health information without the consent of the consumer” when the consumer experiences loss as a result. The definition of consent is borrowed from the VCDPA: a clear affirmative act signifying a consumer’s freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous agreement to process personal data relating to the consumer. Unlike with other consumer health data laws, there is no consent exception for data collection that is necessary to provide the product or service. Moreover, because SB 754 amends the Act instead of the state’s existing omnibus privacy law, a private right of action is available in addition to regulatory enforcement authority.

Details on the key points can be found below.

<ul>
<li>Private Right of Action: SB 754 makes processing personally identifiable reproductive or sexual health information without consent of the consumer a fraudulent act or practice, which is subject to both (1) injunction or civil penalties for willful violations by the state attorney general and (2) the Act’s private right of action remedy. Damages under this private right of action range from the greater of $500 or actual damages. A court can increase those damages from the greater of $1,000 or an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained for willful violations. Plaintiffs may also be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs.
<ul>
<li>Implication: State attorney general remedies, coupled with the availability of the private right of action, create higher risks to companies subject to the law.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>No Threshold Minimums: The Act covers “suppliers,” which are defined broadly as any “seller, lessor, licensor, or professional that advertises, solicits, or engages in consumer transactions, or a manufacturer, distributor, or licensor that advertises and sells, leases, or licenses goods or services to be resold, leased, or sublicensed by other persons in consumer transactions.”
<ul>
<li>Implication: Unlike the VCDPA (which only applies to controllers processing at least 100,000 consumers’ personal data), an entity could fall in scope merely by doing business in Virginia.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Data-Level Exemptions: Unlike the VCDPA, which includes an entity-level exemption for entities covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), SB 754 has a data-level exemption for narrow categories of information, including protected health information (PHI) subject to HIPAA, health records under Virginia’s health records privacy law and patient-identifying records for substance abuse treatment.
<ul>
<li>Implication: Entities that are subject to HIPAA may still have compliance requirements under SB 754 if they are collecting reproductive or sexual health information that is not classified as PHI under HIPAA. This may include, for example, such information that is collected via company websites.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Broad Definition of “Reproductive or Sexual Health Information”: Unlike other consumer health data laws, SB 754 is narrower in scope in that it only covers a subset of health information. Note, however, that this definition broadly covers any “information relating to the past, present, or future reproductive or sexual health of an individual, including:
<ol>
<li>Efforts to research or obtain reproductive or sexual health information services or supplies, including location information that may indicate an attempt to acquire such services or supplies;</li>
<li>Reproductive or sexual health conditions, status, diseases, or diagnoses, including pregnancy, menstruation, ovulation, ability to conceive a pregnancy, whether an individual is sexually active, and whether an individual is engaging in unprotected sex;</li>
<li>Reproductive and sexual health-related surgeries and procedures, including termination of a pregnancy;</li>
<li>Use or purchase of contraceptives, birth control, or other medication related to reproductive health, including abortifacients;</li>
<li>Bodily functions, vital signs, measurements, or symptoms related to menstruation or pregnancy, including basal temperature, cramps, bodily discharge, or hormone levels;</li>
<li>Any information about diagnoses or diagnostic testing, treatment, or medications, or the use of any product or service relating to the matters described in subdivisions 1 through 5; and</li>
<li>Any information described in subdivisions 1 through 6 that is derived or extrapolated from non-health-related information such as proxy, derivative, inferred, emergent, or algorithmic data.</li>
</ol>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li style="list-style-type: none">
<ul>
<li>Implication: The inclusion of “past, present, or future” in the preamble of the definition may be the basis for a plaintiff to bring claims related to a broad range of perinatal products, from pregnancy tests and prenatal vitamins to baby formula and breast pumps. Companies also should carefully assess inferences made about a consumer’s reproductive or sexual health information, even if derived from non-health-related information.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>No Exception for Necessary Disclosures: Unlike other consumer health data laws, which feature a general exception to the consent requirement where disclosure is “necessary to provide a product or service that the consumer to whom such consumer health data relates has requested from such regulated entity or small business,” SB 754 does not include the same consent exception. Rather, SB 754 requires consent prior to obtaining, disclosing, selling or disseminating any “personally identifiable” reproductive or sexual health information.
<ul>
<li>Implication: Under a strict reading of SB 754, a supplier will need to obtain affirmative consent from a consumer for any transaction that discloses reproductive or sexual health information that is “personally identifiable.” This could include consent for disclosures made to vendors such as payment processors that are necessary to process the transaction.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

core/freeform

Data Counsel

Los Angeles

Partner

Jennifer L. Mitchell

New York

Associate

Jiwon (Jamie) Kim

Digital Assets and Data Management

Privacy Governance and Technology Transactions

Healthcare Privacy and Compliance

Heightened Protection of Reproductive Health Information at US State Level on the Rise – Amendments to Virginia’s Consumer Protection Act

Related Services

Featured Insights