Federal agencies are operating in an environment of unprecedented turnover and shifting priorities, which is changing how enforcement actions play out in practice. Understanding these dynamics is critical for companies seeking to manage regulatory risk effectively, as evolving enforcement priorities and reduced agency resources can materially affect investigation outcomes, negotiation leverage and overall exposure.
As a result, businesses facing regulatory scrutiny are dealing with a different landscape than even a few years ago – making it especially important to approach investigations and regulator engagement with a clear, proactive plan.
The New Reality of Government Enforcement
These shifting priorities reflect policy changes under the current administration. New agency leadership is driving a more targeted enforcement agenda that has created a less predictable enforcement environment and workforce disruptions due to substantial departures.
Government agencies are experiencing significant staffing challenges that fundamentally alter how enforcement actions proceed. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota exemplifies this trend, dropping from approximately 60 criminal prosecutors to at one point just 17 full-time attorneys. This represents more than a personnel shortage – it signals a loss of institutional knowledge and leadership that reflects a broader nationwide trend.
Similar patterns emerge across federal agencies. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which should have five commissioners, currently operates with only one. Career civil servants who traditionally helped smooth political transitions have departed in large numbers, taking decades of experience with them.
These departures create a cascade of consequences. Prosecutors who remain often lack the experience to maintain consistent charging standards. The traditional regulatory forces that ensured similarly situated defendants received similar treatment – as established by U.S. Attorney charging memoranda and the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines – lose their normalizing effect when applied by inexperienced staff. The result can mean unpredictability when it comes to plea negotiations.
Opportunities in the Chaos
The upheaval creates strategic opportunities for businesses and their counsel. Defense attorneys report achieving results that would have been unthinkable five years ago, including case dismissals and deferred prosecutions that were previously rare.
The loss of institutional knowledge means businesses can now realistically seek meetings with higher-level officials within agencies. Previously, supervisors would routinely support their teams and refuse to discuss cases with outside counsel. That deference is seemingly waning, creating openings for effective advocacy at senior levels.
Courts are also responding differently to government actions. Federal judges, particularly in districts with significant turnover, show increased skepticism toward prosecution decisions. Challenges to grand jury indictments – once considered futile – now receive serious judicial consideration in some jurisdictions.
Agency-Specific Priorities
Different agencies reflect distinct priority shifts under new leadership. The CFTC has shifted its focus to protecting consumers from fraud and also to asserting its jurisdiction and resulting rulemaking authority over prediction markets. This shift reflects leadership appointments based more on subject-matter focus than broad regulatory experience.
U.S. Attorneys’ Offices show varying responses to political direction. Many districts have placed an increased emphasis on immigration-related offenses, including corporate violations like I-9 compliance failures. Meanwhile, in some districts, program fraud investigations – despite being a stated priority – have stalled due to the departure of experienced white-collar prosecutors.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) continues pursuing fraud cases, even in areas where broader regulatory enforcement has relaxed. Cryptocurrency investigations continue, but recent enforcement actions proceed on consumer fraud theories, demonstrating how agencies adapt their approaches while maintaining enforcement focus.
Managing the New Environment
Businesses should adjust their compliance and response strategies to account for these changes. The traditional approach of working exclusively with line attorneys may no longer be sufficient. Companies facing investigations should consider requesting meetings with supervisory staff or agency leadership, opportunities that were rarely available in the past.
Legal teams must also prepare for increased unpredictability in government responses. Agencies with limited experience may pursue novel theories or fail to follow established procedures. This creates both defensive opportunities and the need for more comprehensive preparation.
The departure of experienced government attorneys also affects the private sector. Former prosecutors and agency attorneys bring valuable institutional knowledge to law firms, helping clients navigate investigations more effectively. This knowledge becomes particularly valuable when agencies lack internal continuity.
What This Means for You
Taken together, these developments are reshaping the enforcement landscape in ways that directly affect how companies should assess risk, respond to investigations and engage with regulators. A less predictable regulatory environment requires businesses to revisit traditional assumptions about how agencies operate. The considerations below highlight practical steps businesses can take to adapt to this evolving reality.
- Reassess compliance programs to account for shifting agency priorities and enforcement approaches
- Consider requesting meetings with senior agency officials when facing investigations, as traditional hierarchies have weakened
- Prepare for increased unpredictability in government responses and case processing timelines
- Leverage opportunities created by inexperienced government teams while maintaining professional standards
- Review legal team composition to include former government attorneys with relevant agency experience
- Monitor specific agency priorities within your industry, as focus areas continue evolving with new leadership
For questions about navigating government investigations and regulatory matters, please contact the authors of this alert or your regular Lathrop GPM attorney.
This legal alert summarizes a presentation from Lathrop GPM’s annual State of Litigation event, held on May 6, 2026, in Kansas City.