From hijacked freight shipments to tampered gift cards hanging on store racks, states are responding to new forms of organized retail crime with a fresh round of legislation.

More than a dozen states this year have passed laws creating new criminal offenses, increasing penalties and establishing specialized task forces and advisory boards designed to better investigate and prosecute organized theft rings.

While organized retail theft has been a growing focus for state lawmakers in recent years, this year’s legislation reflects how the crime has evolved beyond traditional shoplifting. Many of the new laws target fraud schemes that authorities say are increasingly tied to organized criminal groups, including cargo theft, gift card scams and identity theft used to steal freight or merchandise.

In April, the Los Angeles Police Department announced the seizure of about $1 million in stolen merchandise, including products from brands such as ALO, SKIMS, Edikted, Ariat, Milwaukee, Ninja, Dyson and Duracell. 

Investigators recovered 55 pallets of stolen commercial and train cargo from a Van Nuys warehouse, according to a news release. The stolen merchandise was tied to an e-commerce scheme involving the resale of stolen goods through the livestream shopping platform Whatnot.

Reported shoplifting increased 4% in the first half of 2026 compared with the same period in 2025, according to the nonpartisan think tank Council on Criminal Justice’s latest crime trends report. Across the 18 cities included in the analysis, shoplifting rates were about 5% higher than in 2019 and reached their highest level in the nine-year period tracked by the group. 

Still, monthly rates were mostly similar to 2025, with the largest year-over-year increases occurring in February and April. This data only captures incidents reported to police and likely undercount the overall level of shoplifting.

“The number of shoplifting incidents has been declining in the last several years, but the amount stolen per incident has been increasing,” said Marc Levin, the council’s chief policy counsel. 

“Shoplifting rings have gotten more and more sophisticated,” he said, adding that some operations have reportedly hacked into the computer systems that dispatch trucks carrying merchandise to retailers, redirecting the shipments to steal the goods before they are delivered.

Harsher penalties

Several states expanded criminal penalties or gave prosecutors new tools to pursue organized retail theft cases this year.

In Tennessee, Republican Gov. Bill Lee in May signed into law a measure creating a registry of people convicted of retail theft or organized retail crime, including attempted offenses and conspiracies. The registry is only available to law enforcement.

The new law, which took effect earlier this month, also increases penalties for offenders who commit retail theft while carrying a firearm, ammunition or a firearm accessory, possess anti-theft jamming devices or use disguises or fake license plates during a theft. Certain violations now carry mandatory minimum jail sentences.

A new Wisconsin law allows prosecutors to aggregate multiple retail theft offenses when determining criminal penalties and increasing sanctions for repeat offenders.

Two new laws in Wyoming, both of which went into effect this month, increased penalties for repeat theft offenders and created the new offense of absconding for criminal purposes, aimed at people who cross county or state lines to commit additional crimes or conceal stolen property. 

In Oklahoma, a new law broadens the state’s organized retail crime and identity theft statutes by expanding the types of fraud covered and closing loopholes involving elderly people and minors.

Cargo theft

Lawmakers also turned their attention to cargo theft as freight theft has become increasingly sophisticated and costly for retailers and supply chains.

In April, Lee, of Tennessee, signed another piece of legislation creating a legal definition for fraudulent freight theft. The law, which is already in effect, covers schemes involving fake identities used to obtain shipments, illegally rerouted freight and unauthorized transfers of cargo. It also requires local law enforcement agencies to investigate those reports as theft crimes, even if the offense originated elsewhere.

Arkansas Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed legislation in March creating sentence enhancements of up to 10 years for organized cargo theft, with offenders ineligible for early release on the enhanced portion of their sentence.

Arizona created a cargo theft task force within the state attorney general’s office under legislation signed by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in June.

California lawmakers are still considering legislation that would establish a statewide cargo theft task force within the state attorney general’s office. The bill is still under consideration in the Senate, but lawmakers have until November to act.

State officials last month announced that previous investments, including funding for local law enforcement agencies and legislation aimed at strengthening the state’s response to organized retail theft, have resulted in more than 32,000 arrests and nearly $260 million in recovered stolen goods since October 2023.

Michigan lawmakers also are still considering two pieces of legislation that would increase penalties for cargo theft. The bills cleared the House earlier this year. The legislature adjourns in December. 

Gift card fraud

Gift card fraud also emerged as a growing concern this year as lawmakers responded to scams involving tampered cards and stolen account information.

Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed legislation in May creating new crimes for gift card theft, forgery and fraud. The law took effect this month. New laws in Virginia and West Virginia also established gift card fraud as a criminal offense.

Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed legislation in June creating the Retail Theft Prevention Advisory Board within the Department of Public Safety. The board will oversee grant funding, collect statewide data on organized retail theft and gift card fraud, and develop policy recommendations in coordination with state and federal partners.

In Maryland, a new law going into effect in October will prohibit people from altering or tampering with gift cards or their packaging with intent to defraud. The law also establishes how gift cards are valued when determining theft charges.

Kansas Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly signed legislation in February that allows prosecutors to charge people under the state’s financial card crime laws for illegally obtaining or using gift cards to acquire money, goods or services.

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at awatford@stateline.org.

Crime rates continued falling across a sample of large U.S. cities in the first half of 2026, with homicide rates dropping enough to put the nation on track for another historic low in killings.

A new analysis from the nonpartisan think tank Council on Criminal Justice found that nine of 13 crime categories tracked in 36 cities declined compared with the first six months of 2025. Homicides fell 18% in the first half of the year, with 215 fewer killings among the 30 cities that reported data for the offense.

The decline builds on a trend that began in late 2022 after homicide rates surged during the COVID-19 pandemic. The council’s previous analysis estimated that the national homicide rate in 2025 was likely the lowest in more than a century, since at least 1900, based on preliminary data. Final national figures from the FBI are expected later this fall. The group’s latest findings suggest homicide rates could fall further in 2026.

But the researchers cautioned that the data do not reveal what’s driving the decline, nor do they support crediting any single policy or intervention.

“There is no single or easy explanation for these historic lows,” the report’s authors wrote, though they pointed to possible influences, including changes in criminal justice operations, technology, and broader social and cultural shifts.

The continued decline has occurred across cities with different political leadership, policing strategies and economic conditions, said Adam Gelb, the council’s president and CEO, in a news release. 

“Local policies and programs surely matter, but the striking consistency of the decline suggests that macro-level forces are exerting enormous influence as well,” Gelb said.

The report examined monthly crime data from 36 cities that have consistently published incident-level figures over the past nine years, including Baltimore, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. The cities are not necessarily representative of all U.S. cities, and the researchers noted that the figures may change as local agencies update their data.

Homicide was among the offenses with the steepest decline. The average homicide rate in the first half of 2026 was 51% lower than its peak in 2022 and 31% lower than the first half of 2019, before the pandemic-era increase in violence.

Last year’s decline was widespread but not universal. Homicides fell in 21 of the 30 cities with available data, including declines of more than 50% in Rochester, New York; Little Rock, Arkansas; Arlington, Texas; and Colorado Springs, Colorado. Four cities — Austin, Texas; Minneapolis; Norfolk, Virginia; and Pittsburgh — had homicide rates above their 2019 levels.

Other violent crimes also generally declined. Reported robberies dropped 17% compared with the first half of 2025, gun assaults fell 6%, and carjackings declined 47%. The report found the rate of serious violent crimes ending in death, known as lethality, fell 23% compared with the same period last year.

Property crime also continued to trend downward. Motor vehicle theft declined 20% compared with the first half of 2025, while residential burglaries fell 13% and larcenies dropped 6%.

Still, not every category moved in the same direction.

Drug offenses rose 12% compared with the first half of 2025, and reported domestic violence incidents increased 8%. Shoplifting was the only offense tracked that remained higher than before the pandemic, with rates 5% above first-half 2019 levels.

Researchers said those differences highlight the difficulty of identifying a single explanation for the overall decline. Homicides, for example, have fallen much faster than aggravated assaults, which were only 3% lower than 2019 levels.

That gap suggests the forces reducing lethal violence may not be the same as those affecting other forms of crime, according to the report.

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at awatford@stateline.org.

The tiniest menace of summer doesn’t care if you’re hiking through the woods, walking the dog or pulling weeds in your backyard.

It just wants a ride and a meal.

As ticks spread into new parts of the country and emergency room visits for tick bites climb higher than usual, states are scrambling to monitor where the pests are showing up, what diseases they may be carrying and how to warn residents before a bite turns into something far more serious.

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in April that emergency department visits for tick bites were higher than expected across much of the United States and at their highest levels for that point in the year since 2017. 

In June, there were 112 tick-related ER visits per 100,000 people, compared with 110 per 100,000 during the same period last year, according to the CDC’s online tick bite tracker. That suggests this year’s summer trend may be in line with 2025.

Nationwide, the latest available data show an estimated 65 tick bite-related emergency department visits per 100,000 people, up from 47 per 100,000 last year. This year’s current figures are preliminary and subject to change, but if they hold, this year’s rate may be the highest since 2017.

Health officials say the trend reflects a combination of expanding tick populations, changing environmental conditions and increased human exposure during warmer months.

The concern extends well beyond Lyme disease.

The lone star tick, once found primarily in the Southeast, has steadily expanded its range and is known for its aggressive host-seeking behavior, often actively crawling toward people and animals. An adult female is distinguished by a white dot or “lone star” on her back.

The species has been linked to alpha-gal syndrome, an allergy that can cause people to develop severe reactions after eating beef, pork and other mammalian products. Researchers also continue to monitor ticks that carry Rocky Mountain spotted fever, anaplasmosis and other illnesses.

Tick surveillance by state health officials varies widely across the country. Some states maintain active surveillance programs that collect and test ticks to identify where disease-carrying species are becoming established. Other states rely more heavily on human disease reports or passive tick submissions, making it harder to detect changes before infections begin to rise.

Those differences can leave public health officials with an incomplete picture of how quickly tick populations are changing — and where people may face the greatest risk.

Several states, including Massachusetts, Missouri and Oklahoma, have expanded surveillance efforts in recent years or launched public education campaigns as tick habitats shift. All three joined the list of states that now or will soon mandate reporting of alpha-gal syndrome. Other states are studying the spread of lone star ticks and the increasing recognition of the syndrome, which experts believe remains underdiagnosed. 

Some experts say warmer winters in many parts of the country have allowed ticks to remain active for longer periods each year while expanding into regions where they were once uncommon. At the same time, growing white-tailed deer populations and changing land use have created more opportunities for people and ticks to cross paths.

Public health officials say the best defense remains preventing bites altogether. They recommend using insect repellents registered by the Environmental Protection Agency, wearing permethrin-treated clothing, including long sleeves and pants in wooded or grassy areas, checking people and pets for ticks after spending time outdoors and removing attached ticks as soon as they’re found.

For states, the challenge is becoming less about responding to tick season and more about adapting to a future in which, in many places, the season is lasting longer — and the tiny hitchhikers are turning up in places they never did before.

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at awatford@stateline.org.

As federal officials consider whether to reclassify marijuana under federal drug law, a new study has found that more American teenagers seeking treatment for cannabis use disorder, known as CUD, are facing longer wait times before receiving care.

The study, published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, analyzed national data from more than 124,000 adolescent admissions to publicly funded substance use treatment facilities between 2012 and 2022. Researchers found that after several years of decline, the share of young people experiencing delays in accessing treatment increased sharply.

While overall adolescent cannabis use has leveled off or declined slightly over the past decade, some young people who use cannabis regularly develop CUD that requires treatment. 

About 11% of adolescents who use cannabis or marijuana develop CUD within a year, according to the study. With continued use, that risk rises to about 20%. Other research suggests that about 4.7% of adolescents aged 12-17 meet the diagnostic criteria for CUD, a condition in which marijuana use becomes difficult to control and begins interfering with daily life.

According to the study, nearly 34% of adolescents, defined as children aged 12-17, seeking treatment for cannabis use disorder in 2022 experienced an admission delay — defined as waiting several days to more than a month after their initial request for treatment. The authors noted that elevated wait times in 2020 through 2022 may partly reflect COVID-19-related disruptions to treatment services, as well as increased demand for care.

“Just to address these delays, it will require coordinated efforts across health care,” said Yiota Kitsantas, the lead author of the study. Kitsantas is a professor of biostatistics and epidemiology, and interim chair of the Department of Health Administration and Policy at George Mason University. 

“Having proactive screening in primary care and school settings could promote early identification and hopefully then ensure timely access to care,” Kitsantas said. 

The percentage of adolescents reporting delayed treatment represents a significant increase from a low of about 25% in 2015. Longer waits also became more common: The share of adolescents waiting a week or more peaked in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, with about 5% waiting at least 30 days to enter a treatment facility in 2022.

Adolescents referred to long-term rehabilitation or intensive outpatient programs had significantly higher odds of experiencing delays compared with those entering acute detoxification services.

The study also found differences in treatment delays based on living arrangements and referral sources. Youth living with parents or guardians experienced longer waits than unhoused youth, while adolescents referred by health care providers faced higher odds of delays compared with those who sought treatment themselves.

Male adolescents had 11% higher odds of experiencing treatment delays compared with female adolescents. While older teens ages 15 to 17 accounted for most admissions, the increase in wait times from 2018 to 2022 was more pronounced among younger adolescents ages 12 to 14, according to the study.

Non-Hispanic white adolescents had 29% higher odds of experiencing an admission delay compared with Hispanic adolescents. Black, Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native youth had lower odds of experiencing delays than their Hispanic peers, according to the study.

While moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III could ease research restrictions, it would not immediately address local shortages or capacity issues within treatment systems. The potential shift also comes as states grapple with how to regulate increasingly potent cannabis products and address concerns about their potential links to cannabis use disorder and other public health impacts.

During this year’s legislative sessions, several states considered proposals to change or lower cannabis potency limits, though most did not advance.

In Connecticut, lawmakers reinstated a 35% THC cap on cannabis flower just weeks after removing it, citing concerns about the public health effects of increasingly potent products. And Oklahoma approved new packaging and labeling requirements aimed at preventing cannabis products from resembling candy or appealing to children.

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at awatford@stateline.org.

A teenager charged with the same crime can face dramatically different consequences depending on where they live.

In one state, a young person accused of a serious offense may be sent to a juvenile facility focused on treatment and rehabilitation. In another, they could face adult criminal proceedings, a permanent record and the possibility of an adult prison sentence.

This year, more than half a dozen states, including Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri and Utah, have passed new laws reshaping their juvenile legal systems. While some have adopted measures designed to divert more young people from incarceration, others have sought to impose stiffer penalties and expand prosecutors’ authority to pursue adult charges. 

The opposite tacks underscore an increasingly fractured approach to juvenile justice nationwide.

The new laws also come as states grapple with how to respond to serious crimes committed by children while weighing decades of research suggesting adolescents are more capable of rehabilitation than adults. 

Videos of youth-involved assaults, carjackings and large gatherings sometimes called “teen takeovers” frequently spread online, fueling renewed debate over whether tougher punishments or expanded diversion programs are the better path to improving public safety.

In Hawaii, for example, a new law signed in June by Democratic Gov. Josh Green requires judges to consider a child’s history of trauma before deciding whether to transfer a juvenile case to adult court. The law, which took effect immediately upon Green’s signature, also prohibits minors who are victims of sex trafficking or sexual assault from being prosecuted as adults for crimes committed as a result of their exploitation.

Research suggests that incarcerating children and teens in adult prisons, where they may face lengthy sentences and restrictive conditions, can increase the risk of reoffending.

“It wasn’t a question of whether kids had been traumatized, but actually how many traumas they’d experienced,” said Sara Thomas, a research assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University, referring to research that found young people held at the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center in Chicago had experienced a median of six traumatic events.

Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed into law in March a measure that, when it takes effect in August, will overhaul parts of the state’s youthful offender system by requiring trauma-informed care, individualized treatment plans, therapy and reentry-focused programming.

A new law in Minnesota, which also takes effect in August, will raise the minimum age at which a child can enter the juvenile justice system for an offense from 10 to 13. The change stems from legislation passed in 2024. 

Once it takes effect, Minnesota will become one of only three states with a minimum age of delinquency set at 13, joining Maryland and New Hampshire, according to the National Youth Justice Network, an advocacy and research organization.  

Other states are moving in the opposite direction, giving prosecutors and courts more authority to pursue adult penalties in serious cases and arguing that violent offenses require stronger consequences, regardless of a defendant’s age.

In Missouri, a new law will give prosecutors more authority to seek adult charges against young people. Previously, only a juvenile officer or court could request a hearing to transfer a case to adult court. The law also narrows the offenses eligible for adult prosecution to Class A and Class B felonies, such as homicide, first-degree burglary and certain sex offenses, while requiring juvenile records and fingerprints to be added to the state’s criminal history database.

“Missouri must address the revolving door for repeat violent offenders –– and that includes juveniles,” Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe said in a news release.

Mississippi also expanded the circumstances under which young people can face adult charges. A new law effective this month requires 13-year-olds to automatically be tried in adult court for most violent crimes committed while possessing a firearm, even if the firearm was not used. The law prohibits children younger than 13 from being held responsible in adult court for misdemeanors or felonies, though parents or guardians may face civil liability.

A changing landscape

Beginning in the 1990s, amid concerns over violent youth crime, many states expanded laws that allowed more juveniles to be prosecuted as adults. 

But as juvenile crime declined over the following decades and research on adolescent brain development grew, many states began reconsidering those policies. Research suggests that the parts of the brain involved in impulse control, decision making and evaluating long-term consequences continue developing into early adulthood. 

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed the Youth Charging Reform Act into law in May 2026, altering how the state handles juvenile jurisdiction, detention, and confinement. The law, which goes into effect in October, limits when children younger than 13 can be charged with crimes and establishes new reporting metrics to track youth outcomes.

The new law preserves automatic adult court jurisdiction for teens 16 and older accused of offenses punishable by life imprisonment, including homicide and rape. Judges will retain the authority to transfer 14- and 15-year-olds accused of those same life-punishable offenses to adult court under the state’s existing transfer procedures.

The law also tightens detention rules, requiring intake officers to authorize the detention of any child 16 or older accused of a handgun violation or violent crime. By October 2029, children will be barred from being held in adult correctional facilities.

Supporters said the changes recognize that young children who engage in delinquent behavior often have unmet mental health, educational or family needs that are better addressed through services than incarceration.

“This progress brings us closer to ensuring that hundreds of young people in Maryland are met with support and services in the juvenile system, rather than being routed into a process that leads to worse outcomes for both youth and public safety,” state Democratic Sen. Will Smith Jr., the bill’s primary sponsor, said in a news release.

The Maryland State’s Attorneys’ Association views the new law as a step backward, arguing that the state Department of Juvenile Services is not equipped to handle young people accused of violent and repeat offenses.

Baltimore City State’s Attorney Ivan Bates, the association’s president, also criticized the state’s juvenile legal system in a post on X (formerly Twitter), calling it “broken,” just weeks after a multi-jurisdictional crime ring investigation that led to charges against five teens.

“We cannot continue sending children back into a broken system and expect them to be rehabilitated while also expecting our communities to remain safe,” Bates wrote.

Supporters of changes like Maryland’s new law argue that adult convictions can create long-term barriers to employment, housing and education, making it harder for young people to successfully transition into adulthood. Juvenile records are generally confidential.

“Transfer of youth to adult court is bad public policy,” said Mary Ann Scali, the executive director of The Gault Center, a national organization that trains and supports defense attorneys who represent young people in court. “It causes more harm and does not lead to better outcomes for young people or communities.”

Sarah Johnson, senior youth defense counsel with The Gault Center, said research does not support the argument that moving children into adult court improves public safety.

“Transfer does not increase public safety. Transfer increases recidivism. Transfer traumatizes young people because they’re now placed in an adult facility,” Johnson said, noting that children may face heightened risks of physical and sexual abuse from other incarcerated people and staff.

A 2007 review by the Community Preventive Services Task Force, a panel established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to assess the effectiveness of community-based prevention programs and policies, found that transferring young people to adult court did not reduce reoffending and was associated with higher rates of recidivism.

From the peak in youth arrests in 1996 to 2024, the latest year with available data, youth arrests have declined by about 83%, according to federal data. While the number of estimated youth arrests increased between 2021 and 2023 during the COVID-19 pandemic, they fell again in 2024, which is lower than pre-pandemic levels.

In 2024, children and teens accounted for 6.8% of all arrests, according to the latest crime statistics maintained by the FBI. They made up about 10% of arrests for violent crimes and 9.5% of arrests for property crimes.

Despite the long-term decline in youth arrests, states continue to debate how to handle the small percentage of young people involved in serious offenses — and what approaches are most effective at preventing future crime. 

In Utah, lawmakers approved a measure allowing judges to send someone convicted of aggravated murder to adult prison if the person was 17 at the time of the offense and turns 18 before sentencing. The law also expands the state’s collection of recidivism data, including information on arrests and jail time.

Kansas, meanwhile, moved in the opposite direction this year, rolling back parts of a 2016 legislative package designed to reduce youth confinement. A new law, which was adopted in April, creates additional residential placements, expands detention requirements for some youth accused of firearm offenses and repeat offenses, and increases possible sentences for youth who use firearms during crimes. 

Accountability and public safety

While some experts emphasize rehabilitation and keeping young people out of the adult system, others argue that accountability and public safety must remain central goals — particularly when young people commit serious violent offenses. They argue that rehabilitation should not come at the expense of accountability and that the justice system must address the harm caused to victims and communities.

In 2024, Louisiana and North Carolina both passed laws expanding the circumstances under which older teens can face adult criminal proceedings.

In Louisiana, a law pushed by Republican Gov. Jeff Landry rolled back the 2017 “Raise the Age” law that had moved most 17-year-olds into the juvenile justice system while allowing prosecutors to seek adult charges in individual cases. The new law requires all 17-year-olds accused of crimes to be processed through the adult criminal justice system, removing that case-by-case discretion.

As the state has embraced a more punitive approach, it has also seen the cost of its juvenile legal system rise — as well as the number of young people behind bars.

Louisiana also is expanding its youth prison capacity, with plans to open a new 56-bed juvenile facility in Vernon Parish and add 36 beds at the Jetson Center for Youth in East Baton Rouge Parish. 

Some youth advocates say the expansion risks exposing more young people to the harms associated with incarceration.

“When you build a jail, you find a way to fill them,” said Alaina Bloodworth, the executive director of the Black Public Defender Association. Bloodworth previously served as a public defender in Baton Rouge for seven years. “We’re just really going backwards.” 

In North Carolina, a 2024 law requires 16- and 17-year-olds charged with Class A through E felonies to begin their cases in adult criminal court rather than juvenile court, reversing a previous effort to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction. The change has contributed to a sharp increase in the share of youth in detention who are facing adult charges, rising from 39% in 2024 to 65% in 2025, according to the state’s annual report on juvenile justice.

The debate over how to balance accountability and rehabilitation has also been shaped by high-profile incidents involving young people that receive widespread attention online. Viral videos of youth assaults, carjackings and large gatherings have fueled public pressure for tougher approaches to youth crime.

In South Carolina, a Fourth of July city-permitted neighborhood block party in North Charleston drew national attention after videos of the incident spread online. Police said the gathering turned violent, with reports of fights, gunfire and fireworks being fired at vehicles. Officers recovered four firearms, including two automatic weapons, as well as a “makeshift spear,” according to local police.

Two female police officers were injured while attempting to break up fights, and seven people, including four teenagers, were arrested, according to local police.

“We need some help from the community because stuff like this is getting dangerous,” North Charleston police Chief Ron Camacho said during a news conference.  

“I’m looking for any way possible to try and solve this issue of unruly juveniles.” 

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at awatford@stateline.org.