Dozens of federal probes scrapped as state AGs tackle price-gouging

For financial markets, the state AG enforcement surge isn’t just a legal story—it’s a bottom-line risk factor. As costs of essentials like housing and groceries remain painfully high, businesses face not only political pressure but a growing thicket of state-level investigations that can disrupt pricing strategies, slow M&A activity, and raise compliance spending. The question for investors: which companies are most exposed to this decentralized regulatory crackdown?

In a significant realignment of consumer protection enforcement, state attorneys general across the United States are dramatically expanding their roles as the Trump administration systematically dismantles federal regulatory authority. The gutting of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)—an agency born out of the 2008 financial crisis—has left a regulatory vacuum that states, both Republican- and Democratic-led, are increasingly filling through aggressive use of state laws and joint enforcement actions. As prices for essentials like housing, groceries, and fuel continue to strain American households, affordability has become a bipartisan priority, driving state-level activism that is reshaping the legal landscape for businesses and consumers alike.

“

Since President Trump took office in January 2025, the bureau became an early target of billionaire Elon Musk’s short-lived Department of Government Efficiency.

The CFPB, established by the Dodd-Frank Act in 2011, once served as the frontline federal watchdog against deceptive lending, hidden fees, and unfair financial practices. Its enforcement actions returned billions to consumers and set uniform national standards. Since President Trump took office in January 2025, the bureau became an early target of billionaire Elon Musk’s short-lived Department of Government Efficiency. Within months, the agency dropped dozens of ongoing investigations and enforcement cases, moved to slash its workforce, and made it more difficult for consumers to submit complaints. Concurrently, the administration has sought to limit states’ authority to enforce financial services protections under the very law that created the CFPB. This two-pronged assault—reducing federal capacity while constraining state enforcement—has paradoxically galvanized state AGs, who are now leveraging existing state consumer protection statutes and federal antitrust law to take on alleged price gouging, antitrust violations, and deceptive marketing.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, president of the bipartisan National Association of Attorneys General, has been at the forefront, launching a national affordability campaign last year aimed at using state laws to drive down consumer costs. Tong characterizes the effort as “picking up the pieces” of federal abdication. The campaign does not dispute that inflation plays a role in rising prices, but focuses on unlawful business practices that exacerbate the burden. Bipartisan cooperation has emerged: Republican and Democratic AGs are finding common ground in challenging corporate practices they believe harm their constituents, particularly in sectors with concentrated market power. State AGs are employing a dual approach: enforcing existing state unfair and deceptive acts and practices (UDAP) laws, which often mirror federal standards, and using federal antitrust statutes like the Sherman Act. Multi-state coalitions are pooling resources to litigate complex cases, an approach seen in recent opioid and tobacco litigation. This collective action model allows even small states with limited budgets to take on large national corporations.