Throughout 2025, state attorneys general (AGs) took center stage in a range of investigations, enforcement actions, and litigation. As federal enforcement action slows in some areas, and other branches of government struggle to find common ground across the aisle, state AGs have emerged as leaders in enforcement activity and bipartisan collaboration. State AGs from both parties regularly and increasingly come together on bipartisan letters and advocacy, investigations, litigation, and other actions. From these actions and from AG-related gatherings throughout 2025, members of our State Attorneys General Practice have identified the following likely AG priorities for 2026: protecting minors on social media platforms, remedying power and information imbalances between consumers and companies, driving down costs for American families, and pushing back against federal encroachment while emphasizing state enforcement authority. This client alert analyzes these key areas.
Enforcement Against Tech Companies, Especially in the Context of Youth Safety
State AGs have made regulation of technology companies a top priority in recent years, and that focus is certain to continue in 2026, particularly given the perceived void of regulation and enforcement at the federal level. First, AGs have brought a range of actions against online platforms used by children. In 2025, AGs sued several social media companies, gaming platforms and other technology companies under federal and state privacy and consumer protection statutes for allegedly failing to protect children from sexual exploitation and explicit content and improperly using minors’ data. Many of these actions will continue in 2026, and we expect AGs to pursue new, related enforcement actions in the coming year too.
For example, in Florida’s first major enforcement action under the recently enacted Florida Digital Bill of Rights, the state filed a complaint against Roku, Inc., in October 2025 alleging unauthorized processing and sale of sensitive data, including minors’ data, in violation of state law. That same month, the Texas AG announced an expanded investigation of online chat platform Discord over allegations that the platform is addictive and that the company is endangering child safety in violation of Texas’s Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment Act. Developments in these matters in the coming year will provide lessons on the scope of enforcement authority of recently enacted state laws addressing child safety and privacy on technology platforms. New actions are presumed in 2026 too, with state AGs relying on a combination of preexisting or expanded consumer protection statutes as well as newer child safety and privacy statutes.
Second, state AGs across the political spectrum are focused on platforms that feature artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots. AGs have raised concerns that AI chatbots may create codependent relationships and coerce vulnerable youth. States have enacted additional legislation specifically targeting these chatbots, also known as AI companions. For example, New York and California have enacted such laws, which came into effect in November 2025 and January 2026, respectively. Both laws establish mandatory safety protocols for companies operating AI companion models in the states. Significantly, the New York law provides enforcement authority for the state AG, and the California law requires annual reporting to the state’s Office of Suicide Prevention.
Third, state AGs continue to push back against federal preemption of state AI regulation and enforcement. In May and November 2025, the National Association of Attorneys General sent letters on behalf of bipartisan coalitions of state AGs to congressional leaders, urging them to reject proposals for federal moratoria that would have prohibited states from enacting or enforcing laws addressing AI. The state AGs wrote in November that “[b]road preemption of state protections is particularly ill-advised because constantly evolving emerging technologies, like AI, require agile regulatory responses that can protect our citizens.”
Meanwhile, state legislatures are passing AI legislation with a focus on protecting vulnerable populations, including children. For example, the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act went into effect on January 1, 2026, and among other things, it prohibits the development or distribution of sexually explicit content involving minor children. The Texas law grants the AG broad power to issue a civil investigative demand to any AI developer or deployer on the basis of a single complaint. We envision continued pushback against federal encroachment and additional legislative efforts in 2026.
AGs have also formed working partnerships in response to concerns about online platforms’ harm. For example, in November 2025, the Attorney General Alliance launched the Partnership for Youth Online Safety, a new initiative with bipartisan leadership to reduce online harms by co-designing measurable design-based safeguards and best practices, streamlining information sharing, and ensuring online platforms are designed safely. We expect this partnership to result in additional attention and action on this topic in 2026.
Advancing Innovative Consumer Protection Strategies Using State Antitrust Frameworks
State AGs are increasingly acting as independent enforcers of antitrust laws, a trend we predict will continue in 2026. While state AG antitrust enforcement previously centered on joint actions with federal regulators and regional cases focused on their constituencies, the AGs’ focus has expanded to complex, national cases across a range of sectors, including healthcare, environmental markets, and technology.
State AGs have stepped up antitrust enforcement with the help of newly enacted state regulatory regimes that bolster state enforcement power. Many states have enacted laws mirroring the federal Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act, which requires merging parties to notify the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission of transactions exceeding a certain value. While states have historically not required such notice, many states have enacted new, related laws. In 2025, Washington and Colorado became the first two states to enact state-level, comprehensive, and industry-agnostic premerger notification regimes. Several other states have enacted premerger requirements for healthcare and other specific transactions. These laws give state AGs earlier visibility into mergers and enable proactive review, and we anticipate increased scrutiny and more challenges to mergers and acquisitions in 2026, especially in high-profile mergers where there is a perception that there will not be federal enforcement.
2026 is also likely to see more AG scrutiny of AI-powered price-setting technology and its potential role in antitrust violations involving collusion or discriminatory pricing. In 2025, several state AGs sued RealPage, a real estate technology company that uses AI to recommend rental prices, alleging violations of state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Similarly, several state AGs joined the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit against Agri Stats, a firm that aggregates and distributes competitively sensitive information to meat processors. These cases foreshadow what is likely to be increased attention on AI and data aggregation tools that may facilitate potential antitrust violations. Further, states have also passed laws on price-setting technology, and AGs have made statements highlighting this issue as a priority. In late 2025, the California Legislature passed two bills that add new Cartwright Act violations related to the use or distribution of “common pricing algorithms,” which may provide additional opportunities for state AG enforcement in 2026. In late December 2025, the leader of the antitrust division in the Minnesota AG’s Office said that states are keeping a close eye on how algorithmic-pricing tools impact pocketbook issues for consumers. With the increased use of AI-driven algorithms by companies across sectors, antitrust scrutiny of AI-assisted pricing tools is expected to become an important priority for state AGs in 2026.
Securing State AG Authority to Regulate Prediction Markets
We anticipate this year to bring increased scrutiny of gambling and activities that could be characterized as gambling. In recent months, a debate has emerged regarding federal versus state authority over prediction markets, which are platforms that allow users to trade contracts based on future events. Historically, oversight has come primarily from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, but state AGs are beginning to ramp up enforcement, or attempted enforcement, of actions deemed to be gambling. State AGs argue that trading on these event contracts constitutes gambling, which is illegal under certain state laws or at least not properly regulated and taxed.
State AGs have issued opinions and filed lawsuits asserting that trading on event contracts constitutes gambling under state law—we predict further action in this area in 2026. For example, in recent months, the AGs in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Washington have issued directives or opinions stating that prediction markets contracts on sports outcomes are illegal under state law. Some states have filed lawsuits. For instance, in September 2025, Massachusetts AG Andrea Campbell filed a complaint against Kalshi, a predictive market company, claiming that Kalshi’s event contracts function as sports wagers without a license from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. Predictive market companies and their partners have been quick to respond that these state laws are preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act. These legal battles, which will continue into 2026, could significantly impact how prediction markets are regulated. If courts rule in favor of the states, Kalshi and similar prediction markets platforms are likely to face a patchwork of regulatory schemes at a time when state AGs have shown an appetite for increased enforcement with regard to gambling and related activities.
Beyond prediction markets, AGs are tackling from several other angles what they perceive to be gambling, and they will keep up these efforts in 2026. In August 2025, a coalition of 50 state AGs sent a letter to the DOJ, urging federal action against offshore gambling sites. Several states have also expressed interest in targeting sweepstakes casino platforms, which operate a different prize redemption model to evade gambling laws. Recently enacted bans make state AGs responsible for enforcing those prohibitions, and much of this legislative action reflects leadership from the AGs on this issue. For example, in New York, Governor Kathy Hochul signed a ban on sweepstakes casino platforms in December 2025, after AG Letitia James issued cease-and-desist letters to 26 illegal online sweepstakes casinos earlier that year. We expect to see further enforcement actions under the new ban in 2026.
State AGs also retain the ability to use their standard suite of enforcement tools to target companies in the gaming space. That includes their unfair, deceptive or abusive practices authority to target practices perceived to be unfair or marketing they believe to be deceptive. The private bar has already begun bringing cases claiming that apps that offer daily fantasy sports under state laws are engaged in deceptive marketing because those activities are illegal under the law in question.
Additional Areas of Focus
While technology companies, antitrust, and prediction markets are significant priorities, state AGs are pursuing several other areas heading into 2026.
In 2025, some AGs increased scrutiny of ultra-processed foods, artificial dyes and alleged false marketing of certain foods—a trend that is apt to continue. Some states, such as West Virginia, passed laws prohibiting the use of several artificial dyes in certain settings. But in December 2025, a US district judge granted a motion for a preliminary injunction sought by the International Association of Color Manufacturers prohibiting the state from enforcing the law. The legal enforceability of these bans and the role of AGs in protecting the public from food dyes and other related issues are certain to be significant questions in 2026.
AGs have also ramped up investigations into climate, sustainability, and ESG practices and alliances. In October 2025, the AGs of Florida, Texas, Iowa, Nebraska and Montana issued letters to sustainability organizations asserting that their plastics recycling initiatives may violate state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. While these investigations may be more limited to Republican-led states, rather than receiving the broad-based support of some of the other actions discussed above, this interest in climate alliances and policy is sure to continue in 2026.
As states continue trends from 2025 and expand into novel areas and theories of enforcement, our State Attorneys General Practice is well positioned to help clients assess their risk and navigate the various challenges that come with state AG enforcement.
