A New Era in Enforcement
 

In 2025, the federal government has enacted sweeping changes to its law enforcement and regulatory priorities, fundamentally altering the landscape for parallel criminal, civil, and regulatory investigations. Traditionally, federal agencies such as the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have played a central role in white-collar enforcement. However, a marked shift in focus toward immigration, transnational crime, and narcotics trafficking has redirected significant federal resources away from white-collar matters. As a result, state authorities and regulatory agencies are stepping in to fill the enforcement gap, creating a more complex and dynamic environment for companies and individuals facing government scrutiny.

Federal Realignment: The Galeotti Memo

As a panel of experts recently discussed at the Securities Enforcement Forum West 2025, federal criminal authorities have undertaken a dramatic realignment of resources. Recent remarks by Matthew R. Galeotti, the new Chief of DOJ’s Criminal Division, underscore this strategic pivot. The DOJ is now “laser-focused” on the most urgent threats to the nation—namely, fraud targeting individuals, taxpayers, and government programs, as well as cases involving transnational criminal organizations and hostile actors. This realignment means that many traditional white-collar cases are now falling outside the DOJ’s core priorities. Notably, up to 40% of FBI resources in major field offices have reportedly been redirected to immigration enforcement, significantly constraining federal capacity to pursue white-collar investigations.

State Attorneys General and the SEC Step Forward

This evolving federal posture has not gone unnoticed. State attorneys general are increasingly asserting their authority, leveraging consumer protection statutes and state analogs to federal securities laws to pursue complex fraud and securities matters. Recent examples include California Attorney General’s announcement to use the State’s Unfair Competition Law to police Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations, Oregon’s legal action against a prominent cryptocurrency platform, and continued activity by New York and Massachusetts regulators in the digital asset space.

Simultaneously, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has restructured its Division of Enforcement to prioritize investor protection, with a renewed focus on safeguarding retail investors. As federal law enforcement resources are diverted elsewhere, the SEC is poised to play an even more prominent role in investigating and prosecuting securities fraud.

Practical Implications and Best Practices

Given this rapidly changing enforcement landscape, companies and their counsel must adapt to a new reality—one where state investigations are more likely, less predictable, and potentially more volatile. The following best practices are essential for navigating this environment:

1. Act Decisively in the First 48 Hours
Immediately secure all potential sources of data, including emails, messaging apps, and mobile devices. Early control over evidence is critical to establishing credibility with regulators and investigators.

2. Ensure Investigative Independence
The independence and expertise of the investigative team are paramount. Regulators will scrutinize not only the findings but also the process and personnel involved. Engaging experienced, independent counsel and forensic experts can facilitate effective engagement with authorities and inform strategic decision-making.

3. Structure Information Flow
To maintain the integrity of the investigation and preserve privilege, management should be insulated from factual findings until the investigation concludes. A disciplined approach to information management minimizes witness contamination and credibility risks.

4. Be Proactive, Consistent, and Coordinated
With federal and state agencies operating independently, proactive engagement and consistent messaging are vital. Where appropriate, encourage coordination among agencies to ensure fairness and reduce exposure.

5. Recognize the Central Role of State Enforcement
State agencies are no longer peripheral players. Understanding the priorities and remedies available to each enforcement authority is now a core component of any effective defense strategy.

Conclusion

As federal priorities shift and state and regulatory agencies assume a more prominent role, companies must be prepared to respond to a new and evolving enforcement landscape. Retaining experienced and credible advisors is not just prudent—it is essential. Navigating parallel investigations now requires a nuanced understanding of both federal and state mandates, as well as the agility to respond to multiple authorities with differing objectives and tools. In this environment, readiness and expertise are your best defense.