Hunton Andrews Kurth writes: On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), limiting damages, applies retroactively to pending cases. The ruling in Clay v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, Docket No. 25-2185 (7th Cir. 2026), represents a major win for...

Aaron Graf of  Amundsen Davis LLC writes: Under Wisconsin law, employees must first be the victim of identity theft or other concrete, imminent harm to have standing to sue employer for data breach. Mere risk of future data misuse is not enough to establish standing. […] A recent Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision, though unpublished,...

Sydney Haulenbeek reports:  A magistrate judge on Wednesday blocked the government from examining data that it seized from a Washington Post reporter last week. In a two-page order, Magistrate Judge William B. Porter granted the Post’s request for a standstill order, halting the federal government from reviewing any of the materials they seized from the property...

Joseph Lazzarotti of JacksonLewis writes: As we have discussed in prior posts, AI-enabled smart glasses are rapidly evolving from niche wearables into powerful tools with broad workplace appeal — but their innovative capabilities bring equally significant legal and privacy concerns. In Part 1, we addressed compliance issues that arise when these wearables collect biometric information. In Part...