Capital Forum Brings State Law Enforcement Priorities Into Focus
State Attorneys General from all over the United States gathered in the nation’s capital on December 8-10 for the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) Capital Forum, an annual event where they share presentations and engage in dialogue about enforcement priorities. Attorneys from Shook’s Government Investigations and White Collar Practice were in attendance, and walked away with some insights into how these key law enforcement officials are likely to approach their roles in 2026 and beyond.
Focus on Collaboration
Beginning with the first public session, the attorneys generals emphasized how they could accomplish more by working together. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost delivered a keynote address about how state attorneys general had worked together in the early 1900s to take on the Standard Oil trust, which used exclusionary practices, predatory refining prices, and laws designed to exclude competitors. An Ohio Attorney General had obtained a state supreme court order breaking up the trust, but Standard Oil refused to comply with the decision and moved its headquarters to New York. It was only through collaboration that the AGs had any hope of taking on such powerful business interests. Yost emphasized that, despite differing politics, there have been many areas where state attorneys general have successfully joined forces, such as opioid litigation (50 states, Washington, D.C., and four U.S. territories), robocall litigation (49 states) and social media litigation (29 states). In meeting, the state attorneys general are not seeking political unity or fellowship, but rather to further each of their individual missions, which often overlap. Individually, the AGs may not have the scope or reach to take on large problems, but together they augment their powers.
Another panel, which included Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, addressed state and federal partnerships in antitrust enforcement. The panelists spoke of the continuity of approach to antitrust between the Biden and Trump administrations, which might surprise some in light of the political differences between the two administrations. They also emphasized the leading role state attorneys general have played in this area, for instance on matters involving college athletics, generic prescription drugs, and the mobile phone industry.
Yet another type of collaboration that the attorneys generals discussed was that which arises when local governments retain outside counsel and seek to litigate issues traditionally handled by the AGs on behalf of the state. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan walked through the ethical issues that may arise with such arrangements. The attorneys general recognized that outside counsel can help states take on matters that might otherwise be too large or too specialized, but stressed that their participation should not be allowed to delay settlements (and much-needed relief for victims) with haggling over attorneys’ fees.
Targeting Rising Costs
In an era where inflation has been closely watched, it is perhaps unsurprising that the state attorneys general discussed strategies for lowering their constituents’ costs. NAAG President and Connecticut Attorney General William Tong moderated a panel discussion that featured New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway. The panelists discussed antitrust litigation aimed at bringing down the costs of generic prescription drugs, state investigations into discrepancies between the prices displayed and the prices actually charged by retail chains, and efforts to combat “junk fees” that raise costs for consumers in various industries including cable television, air travel and dining. In particular, the AGs discussed concerns about the rising costs of health care as consolidation of hospitals and medical centers continues and access to services may decrease. Health care providers must of course be carefully regulated so as to maintain quality care and prevent fraud, but excessive scrutiny may push providers out of the industry and drive up costs. The attorneys general also emphasized the importance of transparency in pricing generally so that consumers know exactly what they are paying for and what they are getting.
Innovation and Safety
As new technologies are developed and mature, new legal concerns may emerge and the attorneys general discussed their efforts to stay on the forefront. Social media was the subject of a panel featuring Ohio AG Yost and Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, on which representatives of the scientific community and parent advocacy groups discussed their views on how social media may impact children. A separate panel moderated by Washington Attorney General Nick Brown addressed predictive markets, which allow participants to trade contracts based on the outcome of future events, such as elections, economic indicators or pop culture occurrences. Panelists spoke about the tension between federal regulation of these markets as providing derivatives products and the traditional state regulation of gambling. With these markets becoming more popular and nearly 40 jurisdictions having legalized sports betting over the last seven years, this tension is likely to grow in the coming years.
Eyes on the Supreme Court
The Capital Forum also included a program hosted by the director of the Center for Supreme Court Advocacy, Dan Schweitzer, on what the panelists agreed was a blockbuster term at the United States Supreme Court. With significant issues like President Donald Trump’s tariffs, his power to remove directors of independent agencies, voting rights, and birthright citizenship before the Court, the ramifications of these cases are likely to be felt for years to come.
Conclusion
NAAG’s recent Capital Forum provided a unique opportunity to not only hear directly from multiple state attorneys general but also to observe these officials in direct conversation with one another. With this year’s emphasis on collaboration at the Forum, it is clear that states will be looking to align on their priorities and enforcement activities to the greatest extent possible. (Though in this divided age, the alignment is unlikely to be complete!) As leaders in the enforcement space, Shook’s government investigations and white collar attorneys were pleased to take part in this program and to provide clients and potential clients with this high-level overview.
Focus on Collaboration
Beginning with the first public session, the attorneys generals emphasized how they could accomplish more by working together. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost delivered a keynote address about how state attorneys general had worked together in the early 1900s to take on the Standard Oil trust, which used exclusionary practices, predatory refining prices, and laws designed to exclude competitors. An Ohio Attorney General had obtained a state supreme court order breaking up the trust, but Standard Oil refused to comply with the decision and moved its headquarters to New York. It was only through collaboration that the AGs had any hope of taking on such powerful business interests. Yost emphasized that, despite differing politics, there have been many areas where state attorneys general have successfully joined forces, such as opioid litigation (50 states, Washington, D.C., and four U.S. territories), robocall litigation (49 states) and social media litigation (29 states). In meeting, the state attorneys general are not seeking political unity or fellowship, but rather to further each of their individual missions, which often overlap. Individually, the AGs may not have the scope or reach to take on large problems, but together they augment their powers.
Another panel, which included Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, addressed state and federal partnerships in antitrust enforcement. The panelists spoke of the continuity of approach to antitrust between the Biden and Trump administrations, which might surprise some in light of the political differences between the two administrations. They also emphasized the leading role state attorneys general have played in this area, for instance on matters involving college athletics, generic prescription drugs, and the mobile phone industry.
Yet another type of collaboration that the attorneys generals discussed was that which arises when local governments retain outside counsel and seek to litigate issues traditionally handled by the AGs on behalf of the state. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan walked through the ethical issues that may arise with such arrangements. The attorneys general recognized that outside counsel can help states take on matters that might otherwise be too large or too specialized, but stressed that their participation should not be allowed to delay settlements (and much-needed relief for victims) with haggling over attorneys’ fees.
Targeting Rising Costs
In an era where inflation has been closely watched, it is perhaps unsurprising that the state attorneys general discussed strategies for lowering their constituents’ costs. NAAG President and Connecticut Attorney General William Tong moderated a panel discussion that featured New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway. The panelists discussed antitrust litigation aimed at bringing down the costs of generic prescription drugs, state investigations into discrepancies between the prices displayed and the prices actually charged by retail chains, and efforts to combat “junk fees” that raise costs for consumers in various industries including cable television, air travel and dining. In particular, the AGs discussed concerns about the rising costs of health care as consolidation of hospitals and medical centers continues and access to services may decrease. Health care providers must of course be carefully regulated so as to maintain quality care and prevent fraud, but excessive scrutiny may push providers out of the industry and drive up costs. The attorneys general also emphasized the importance of transparency in pricing generally so that consumers know exactly what they are paying for and what they are getting.
Innovation and Safety
As new technologies are developed and mature, new legal concerns may emerge and the attorneys general discussed their efforts to stay on the forefront. Social media was the subject of a panel featuring Ohio AG Yost and Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, on which representatives of the scientific community and parent advocacy groups discussed their views on how social media may impact children. A separate panel moderated by Washington Attorney General Nick Brown addressed predictive markets, which allow participants to trade contracts based on the outcome of future events, such as elections, economic indicators or pop culture occurrences. Panelists spoke about the tension between federal regulation of these markets as providing derivatives products and the traditional state regulation of gambling. With these markets becoming more popular and nearly 40 jurisdictions having legalized sports betting over the last seven years, this tension is likely to grow in the coming years.
Eyes on the Supreme Court
The Capital Forum also included a program hosted by the director of the Center for Supreme Court Advocacy, Dan Schweitzer, on what the panelists agreed was a blockbuster term at the United States Supreme Court. With significant issues like President Donald Trump’s tariffs, his power to remove directors of independent agencies, voting rights, and birthright citizenship before the Court, the ramifications of these cases are likely to be felt for years to come.
Conclusion
NAAG’s recent Capital Forum provided a unique opportunity to not only hear directly from multiple state attorneys general but also to observe these officials in direct conversation with one another. With this year’s emphasis on collaboration at the Forum, it is clear that states will be looking to align on their priorities and enforcement activities to the greatest extent possible. (Though in this divided age, the alignment is unlikely to be complete!) As leaders in the enforcement space, Shook’s government investigations and white collar attorneys were pleased to take part in this program and to provide clients and potential clients with this high-level overview.
