DOJ's New Enforcement Priorities: Tougher on Fraud, Shifting Consumer Protection

This week, the Department of Justice made waves with its major restructuring announcement: the long-standing Consumer Protection Branch will be dissolved as of September 30, and a new Enforcement & Affirmative Litigation Branch will take charge of civil enforcement efforts. This move, confirmed on September 22, not only changes DOJ’s organizational chart but signals a significant shift in enforcement across multiple industries and regulatory spheres. The new branch will target violations previously handled by the Consumer Protection Branch, including statutes overseen by agencies like the FDA, FTC, CPSC, DEA, and NHTSA, with an increased focus on matters like immigration-related enforcement and defective products. Oversight falls to Deputy Assistant Attorney General leadership and a dedicated team of experienced litigators, but some experts warn that dispersing seasoned personnel could lead to inconsistencies on consumer health and safety investigations nationally. On the criminal enforcement front, DOJ’s newly unveiled White Collar Enforcement Plan draws a hard line against fraud and abuse, especially where U.S. taxpayers and markets are at risk. Matthew Galeotti, head of the Criminal Division, announced that resources will “focus on the most egregious white collar crimes,” such as health care fraud, federal program abuse, and trade-related violations. The DOJ has rebranded its Market, Government, and Consumer Fraud Unit to tackle customs and tariff fraud more aggressively, introducing the interagency Trade Fraud Task Force in tandem with Homeland Security. This not only means increased scrutiny of businesses importing goods, but it also creates new incentives for whistleblowers—employees and insiders who can now receive awards for tipping off authorities about corporate or trade violations. Newly revised enforcement policies include updated criteria for compliance monitorships, meaning fewer costly monitors for companies that voluntarily disclose misconduct and take steps to remediate. This should translate to clearer outcomes and incentives for organizations willing to cooperate. For state and local governments, changes in consumer protection enforcement may complicate coordination, especially on cases affecting public health or safety, while stronger cross-agency partnerships and federal lawsuits—such as DOJ’s recent suit against six states for voter registration compliance announced yesterday—point to a more involved federal role in election integrity and regulatory oversight. For businesses, these changes bring a dual challenge: the need for compliance programs responsive to new enforcement priorities, and heightened risk if internal controls are lacking. For U.S. citizens, the hope is a safer marketplace and stronger protections against fraud and counterfeit drugs, but also the potential for confusion as regulatory responsibilities shift and collaboration evolves. Looking ahead, listeners should watch for new enforcement actions as DOJ This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI.