Stores and delivery apps increasingly use software to set prices. Some pricing changes are familiar, such as sales, coupons, or markdowns on food close to expiration. The newer concern is personalized pricing or surveillance pricing. The FTC said its surveillance-pricing study found that data such as precise location and browser history can be used to target consumers with different prices. Maryland approved HB 895 on April 28, 2026, making it the first state to restrict some data-driven price increases in grocery stores and third-party food delivery. The law focuses on grocers and delivery services and is meant to stop personal data from being used to set higher prices. New York lawmakers have also advanced consumer-protection legislation aimed at algorithmic or device-based pricing, showing that this debate is spreading beyond one state. Supporters of strong rules say groceries are basic needs, and shoppers should not have to guess whether their data is being used against them. Critics say broad bans could block useful tools, such as discounts, loyalty offers, fast price updates, or markdowns that reduce food waste. The question is whether states should ban personalized pricing in essential goods, require disclosure and consent, regulate only the riskiest uses, leave most pricing flexibility to businesses, or push for one national standard. I am not sure a total ban is the right answer, but grocery pricing is too important to leave completely opaque. If stores are using personal data to decide what people pay for basic food, the public should know that and have real limits on the worst uses.