The Trump administration is suing the state of California to block animal welfare laws that it says unconstitutionally helped send egg prices soaring. But a group that spearheaded the requirements pushed back, blaming bird flu for the hit to consumers’ pocketbooks.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California on Wednesday, challenges voter initiatives that passed in 2018 and 2008. They require that all eggs sold in California come from cage-free hens.

The Trump administration says the law imposes burdensome red tape on the production of eggs and egg products across the country because of the state’s outsize role in the national economy.

“It is one thing if California passes laws that affects its own State, it is another when those laws affect other States in violation of the U.S. Constitution,” U.S. Agriculture Brooke Rollins said in a statement Thursday. “Thankfully, President Trump is standing up against this overreach.”

Egg prices soared last year and earlier this year due in large part to bird flu, which has forced producers to destroy nearly 175 million birds since early 2022. But prices have come down sharply recently. While the Trump administration claims credit for that, seasonal factors are also important. Avian influenza, which is spread by wild birds, tends to spike during the spring and fall migrations and drop in summer.

“Pointing fingers won’t change the fact that it is the President’s economic policies that have been destructive,” the California Department of Justice said in a statement Friday. “We’ll see him in court.”

The average national price for a dozen Grade A eggs declined to $5.12 in April and $4.55 in May after reaching a record $6.23 in March, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But the May price was still 68.5% higher than a year earlier.

“Trump’s back to his favorite hobby: blaming California for literally everything,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a social media post.

The federal complaint alleges that California contributed to the rise in egg prices with regulations that forced farmers across the country to adopt more expensive production practices. The lawsuit also asserts that it is the federal government’s legal prerogative to regulate egg production. So it seeks to permanently block enforcement of the California regulations that flowed from the two ballot measures.

“Americans across the country have suffered the consequences of liberal policies causing massive inflation for everyday items like eggs,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. “Under President Trump’s leadership, we will use the full extent of federal law to ensure that American families are free from oppressive regulatory burdens and restore American prosperity.”

While 2018’s Proposition 12 also banned the sale of pork and veal in California from animals raised in cages that don’t meet minimum size requirements, the lawsuit only focuses on the state’s egg rules.

Humane World for Animals, which was named the Humane Society of the United States when it spearheaded the passage of Proposition 12, says avian influenza and other factors drove up egg prices, not animal welfare laws. And it says much of the U.S. egg industry went cage-free anyway because of demand from consumers who don’t want eggs from hens confined to tiny spaces.

“California has prohibited the sale of cruelly produced eggs for more than a decade — law that has been upheld by courts at every level, including the Supreme Court. Blaming 2025 egg prices on these established animal welfare standards shows that this case is about pure politics, not constitutional law,” Sara Amundson, president of the Humane World Action Fund, said in a statement.

The American Egg Board, which represents the industry, said Friday that it will monitor the progress of the lawsuit while continuing to comply with California’s laws, and that it appreciates Rollins’ efforts to support farmers in their fight against bird flu and to stabilize the egg supply.

“Egg farmers have been both responsive and responsible in meeting changing demand for cage-free eggs, while supporting all types of egg production, and continuing to provide options in the egg case for consumers,” the board said in a statement.

NEW YORK (AP) — A “click-to-cancel” rule, which would have made it easier for consumers to end unwanted subscriptions, has been blocked by a federal appeals court days before it was set to go into effect. But there are ways to end those subscriptions and memberships, even if they take some work.

The rule would also have required companies to disclose when free trials and promotional offers would end and let customers cancel recurring subscriptions as easily as they started them. But even without the new federal guidance, here are some ways to stay on top of subscription and membership fees.

Use calendar reminders and regularly review your bills

Experts at the Consumer Federation of America recommend setting calendar reminders for whenever a free trial period ends, to alert yourself to cancel promotional offers before the real recurring costs kick in. The auto-enrollment process, in which the company does not remind the consumer via email that a trial is about to end and higher monthly payments will begin, was also at the heart of the FTC’s rule.

“No subscription business model should be structured to profit from a gauntlet-style cancellation process,” said Erin Witte, Director of Consumer Protection for the Consumer Federation of America, in a statement on the click-to-cancel rule.

Regularly reviewing your credit card and debit card bills can also help you keep track of any recurring charges — including price increases you may have missed or that you didn’t anticipate when trying out a new membership or subscription.

Know the terms and conditions of a given subscription

“Companies make it easy for consumers to click to sign up and easy for the companies to automatically withdraw funds from consumers’ accounts,” said Shennan Kavanagh, Director of Litigation at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) in a statement on the FTC’s click-to-cancel rule. “People should not (have to) spend months trying to cancel unwanted subscriptions.”

Given the FTC’s vacated rule, though, companies may still legally require that customers cancel memberships or subscriptions by phone, even as they permit signing up, enrolling, and paying bills online. Consumer advocates say this places an extra burden of time and energy on the consumer to stop an unwanted recurring fee, but sometimes knowing the terms of the subscription and getting on the phone is worth the trouble.

There are some services that unenroll you

Apps like Rocket Money and services like Trim, which is accessed through a browser, can keep track of your recurring monthly fees and subscriptions, for free — or for a fee — and can help you catch new ones or even unsubscribe from some services.

For parents, especially, a service like Trim could help inform them that a child has started a new subscription, game or membership before the fees recur. And Rocket Money will actively work to end unwanted subscriptions for you, for a monthly price. If the company can’t successfully end or cancel the subscription or membership, it will give the customer the information needed to do so. Trim also provides this service, in its premium form, for an additional fee.

Resist deals when canceling

The FTC is currently moving forward with preparations for a trial involving Amazon’s Prime program, which accuses the retailer of enrolling consumers in its Prime program without their consent and making it difficult to cancel subscriptions.

Often, when a consumer tries to cancel a subscription for something like Prime, which offers free delivery and streaming video, the company will offer a month or more of the subscription at a promotional rate — half off, or at other, better-seeming values, to entice a customer to stay. Staying strong in the face of what may appear to be a good deal can help you stop recurring monthly fees before you forget to cancel them again.

Agreeing to yet another trial or promotional rate, which is another on-ramp to auto-enrollment, just continues the cycle, according to consumer advocates.

What would the FTC’s rule have done?

The FTC’s rule would have required businesses to obtain a customer’s consent before charging for memberships, auto-renewals and programs linked to free trials. The businesses would have also had to disclose when free trials and promotional offers would end.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said this week that the FTC made a procedural error by failing to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis, which is required for rules whose annual impact on the U.S. economy is more than $100 million.

The FTC said that it did not have to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis because it initially determined that the rule’s impact on the national economy would be less than $100 million. An administrative law judge decided that the economic impact would be more than the $100 million threshold, and the court decided to vacate the rule.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration had included the FTC’s proposal as part of its “Time is Money” initiative, which aimed to crack down on consumer-related hassles.

——

“The Associated Press receives support from Charles Schwab Foundation for educational and explanatory reporting to improve financial literacy. The independent foundation is separate from Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. The AP is solely responsible for its journalism.”

LONDON (AP) — “The Salt Path” is a memoir of resilience and courage that captured the hearts of millions and which was subsequently adapted for the big screen, with actors Gillian Anderson and Jason Isaacs taking the lead roles.

But now, the book and the film are mired in a controversy that could see them suffer that very modern phenomenon — being canceled.

A bombshell report in last Sunday’s “The Observer” newspaper in the U.K. claimed there was more to the 2018 book than met the eye — that key elements of the story had been fabricated.

Author Raynor Winn stands accused of betraying the trust of her readers and of reaping a windfall on the back of lies. Winn accepts “mistakes” were made, but that the overarching allegations were “highly misleading.” She has sought legal counsel.

On Friday, publisher Penguin Michael Joseph agreed with Winn to delay the publication of her next book, according to specialist magazine The Bookseller.

The book

Winn’s book tells how she and her husband of 32 years, Moth Winn — a well-to-do couple — made the impulsive decision to walk the rugged 630 miles (around 1,000 kilometers) of the South West Coast Path in the southwest of England after losing their house because of a bad business investment.

Broke and homeless, the memoir relays how the couple achieved spiritual renewal during their trek, which lasted several months and which saw them carry essentials and a tent on their back.

The book also recounts how Moth Winn was diagnosed with the extremely rare and incurable neurological condition, corticobasal degeneration, or CBD, and how his symptoms had abated following the walk.

It sold 2 million copies in the U.K., became a regular read at book clubs, spawned two sequels and the film adaptation, which was released this spring, to generally positive reviews.

On its website, publisher Penguin described the book as “an unflinchingly honest, inspiring and life-affirming true story of coming to terms with grief and the healing power of the natural world. Ultimately, it is a portrayal of home, and how it can be lost, rebuilt, and rediscovered in the most unexpected ways.”

That statement was released before the controversy that erupted last Sunday.

The controversy

In a wide-ranging investigation, The Observer said that it found a series of fabrications in Raynor Winn’s tale. It said the couple’s legal names are Sally and Timothy Walker, and that Winn misrepresented the events that led to the couple losing their home.

The newspaper said that the couple lost their home following accusations that Winn had stolen tens of thousands of pounds from her employer. It also said that the couple had owned a house in France since 2007, meaning that they weren’t homeless.

And perhaps more damaging, the newspaper said that it had spoken to medical experts who were skeptical about Moth having CBD, given his lack of acute symptoms and his apparent ability to reverse them.

The book’s ability to engender empathy from its readers relied on their personal circumstances. Without those hooks, it’s a very different tale.

The response

As a writer of what was represented as a true story, Winn had to attest to her publisher that the book was a fair and honest reflection of what transpired.

Any memoir may have omissions or hazy recollections.

But making things up are a clear no-no.

In the immediate aftermath, Winn made a brief comment on her website about the “highly misleading” accusations and insisted that the book “lays bare the physical and spiritual journey Moth and I shared, an experience that transformed us completely and altered the course of our lives. This is the true story of our journey.”

She fleshed out her response on Wednesday, describing the previous few days have been “some of the hardest of my life,” while acknowledging “mistakes” in her business career.

She also linked documents appearing to show Moth had been diagnosed with CBD, and described how the accusations that Moth made up his illness have left them “devastated.”

After the allegations were published, Penguin said it undertook “the necessary pre-publication due diligence,” and that prior to the Observer story, it hadn’t received any concerns about the book’s content.

The long-term

It’ll be interesting to see how the book’s sales and the film’s box office receipts are affected by the controversy. Those should start emerging in the coming days.

In addition, there are questions now as to whether the film will find a U.S. distributor and whether Winn, in particular, will face compensation claims, potentially even from readers.

Winn was meant to be in the western England town of Shrewsbury on Friday on the Saltlines tour, a “words and music collaboration” between her and folk band The Gigspanner Big Band.

Her legal team said that Winn is “deeply sorry to let down those who were planning to attend the Saltlines tour, but while this process is ongoing, she will be unable to take part.”