Republican Sen. Josh Hawley says he plans to introduce legislation targeting “surveillance pricing,” in which companies use personal data and artificial intelligence to set individualized prices.
Maryland, Connecticut, and New Jersey have enacted restrictions on the practice, though their laws differ substantially in scope and enforcement.
Hawley’s announcement adds Republican support to an issue already addressed by Democratic proposals, creating the possibility of a bipartisan federal push.
Three states have banned surveillance pricing. Now, Washington has noticed.
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-M0.) said he plans to introduce legislation targeting companies that use artificial intelligence and consumers’ personal information to determine how much an individual shopper is willing to pay.
The Missouri Republican announced the coming proposal after chairing a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing this week on “surveillance pricing,” a term used by critics to describe the use of browsing histories, locations, purchase records, and other data to generate individualized prices. Hawley said he expects to introduce legislation “soon,” though he has not released bill text or provided details about its scope.
“This is one of the biggest scams in American history,” Hawley said at the hearing, describing the combination of corporate data collection and AI pricing tools as “the unholy trinity of everything Americans hate: spying on people, ripping them off, and taking away jobs.” Hawley’s office published excerpts from the hearing Wednesday.
The announcement elevates to the national level a campaign already advancing through state legislatures. Maryland, Connecticut, and New Jersey have enacted laws restricting surveillance pricing this year, but their approaches vary.
Maryland acted first
Maryland became the first state to act when Gov. Wes Moore signed the Protection From Predatory Pricing Act in April. The law prohibits covered food retailers and third-party delivery services from using personal data to charge higher prices for certain food, while permitting specified discounts and loyalty programs. It takes effect Oct. 1, according to the Maryland General Assembly.
Connecticut’s law prohibits surveillance pricing in in-person transactions and requires online businesses to tell shoppers when their personal information was used to increase a price. The required warning says: “THIS PRICE WAS INCREASED USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA.” The provisions are contained in Public Act 26-130.
New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act on July 23. It bars grocery retailers and delivery platforms from using personal or biometric data to charge different customers different prices for identical products. The law also imposes a one-year moratorium on the installation of new electronic shelf labels at large food retailers, according to the governor’s office.
How surveillance pricing works
At Tuesday’s hearing, witnesses described how companies can combine data on a shopper’s location, household, purchases, browsing behavior, and perceived urgency to estimate the highest price that person might accept.
Lindsay Owens, president of the Groundwork Collaborative, cited her organization’s investigation of Instacart. She testified that shoppers were shown different prices for the same groceries at the same time and pickup location. More than three-quarters of the items in the test basket appeared at multiple prices, she said, with differences reaching 23% for a carton of eggs.
Instacart has previously characterized such testing as a way for retailers to evaluate pricing strategies and has said it does not use individual shoppers’ personal data to determine the prices they see.
Hawley also highlighted the experience of an airline customer who reported that a JetBlue fare rose by $230 while he was arranging travel to a funeral. JetBlue’s social-media account advised the customer to clear his browser cache and cookies or use a private window. Owens told senators that the response suggested browsing data could be affecting the transaction, although the exchange alone did not establish precisely how JetBlue calculated the fare.
Taking the other side
Not every witness endorsed a prohibition. Z. John Zhang, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, argued that personalized pricing can lower costs for price-sensitive customers, expand access, and intensify competition. He urged lawmakers to focus on abuses of personal data and market power rather than outlawing variable prices themselves.
That distinction could become central to Hawley’s legislation. Dynamic pricing traditionally changes a price for everyone in response to demand, inventory, or timing. Surveillance pricing goes further by using information about a particular person to determine the price offered to that individual. A federal bill would also have to distinguish covert personalization from familiar programs such as senior discounts, student rates, coupons, and uniformly available loyalty rewards.
The hearing revealed potential bipartisan support. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said Congress needs “a federal law,” “federal standards,” and “national safeguards.” He said he and Hawley already have a framework for broader AI legislation, though neither senator described a finalized surveillance-pricing agreement.
Hawley would not be the first senator to propose federal restrictions. Similar proposals were offered in 2025 by Democratic lawmakers.
Hawley’s involvement could alter that political equation by giving the issue a prominent Republican advocate and tying it to the broader cost-of-living debate. But until he releases legislative language, crucial questions remain unanswered:
Which industries would be covered?
What personal information can companies use?
Can consumers sue violators?
How will ordinary discounts be protected?