As we look ahead to a potential change in control in Congress following the 2026 midterm elections, companies should brace for more active and far-reaching congressional oversight. With the 2028 presidential election cycle top of mind, Democratic leaders—should they win control of the House or Senate—have signaled an intention to pursue robust oversight across a range of issues they view as central to the concerns of the American public, including oversight of the Trump Administration, focusing on perceived corruption and accountability; affordability issues; and scrutiny of the technology sector, focusing especially on artificial intelligence (AI). 

To illustrate, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, has said that he plans to focus on allegations of self-enrichment, examining purported “systems of bribery, kickback and financial corruption, and opportunities for disgorgement and restitution to the American people.” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has likewise indicated that oversight of potential conflicts of interest and corruption related to the current Administration will be a central focus. For his part, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) recently launched the Democrats’ “Fighting for an Affordable America” agenda, elevating affordability, economic fairness, and other “kitchen table” issues as key priorities for the next Congress. At the same time, a focus on the technology sector is expected to continue, including on issues relating to AI, data centers, workforce impacts, and child and consumer safety. Recent statements and legislative activity by Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, reflect the continued salience of these issues, especially among progressive Democrats.     

Against this backdrop, companies should consider evaluating potential areas of congressional interest and developing response strategies before receiving an inquiry. Advanced planning can position companies to respond more effectively in a fast-moving oversight environment and, in some cases, may create opportunities to address potential areas of concern before they become the subject of congressional scrutiny. 

Trump Administration Oversight

Oversight directed at the White House presents unique separation-of-powers considerations, including executive privilege and other institutional equities that may limit congressional access to information. Indeed, the Trump White House is unlikely to fully cooperate with direct oversight requests related to the President and his advisers. To the extent congressional requests directed at the White House and Executive Branch do not yield the information sought by investigators, we expect that congressional committees will turn quickly and aggressively to third parties, including the private sector, as a means of obtaining the desired information, seeking documents, communications, and testimony from companies and individuals perceived to have relevant information or touchpoints with the Administration.

This approach has clear precedent. During the Biden Administration, House Republicans directed investigative requests to private companies, in addition to the White House and agencies, seeking the companies’ communications with the Executive Branch as part of broader investigations of the Administration.

Indeed, congressional Democrats have already signaled an interest in obtaining information from private actors when examining issues involving the Executive Branch. As just one example, House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie Thompson (D-MS) sent letters to corporations that donated to the White House ballroom project, seeking information regarding the contributions. These inquiries illustrate that companies may face congressional scrutiny not necessarily because of alleged wrongdoing, but because Congress views them as potentially relevant sources of information concerning matters under investigation.

Similarly, companies that received government contracts or entered into agreements with the Trump Administration may also receive oversight inquiries, as Democrats seek to highlight perceived corruption or conflicts of interest. Congress may also investigate entities that entered into agreements to restore federal funding to learn more about the terms of such agreements or companies that received other regulatory relief or economic benefits, such as tariff exemptions.

Additionally, companies that play a central role in implementing core Trump Administration policy priorities, particularly in high-profile areas like immigration enforcement, may attract congressional attention as Congress seeks to investigate how such policies are being carried out. Because such companies may possess information regarding the operation, costs, implementation, and practical effects of government programs, they may be viewed as important sources of information for congressional investigators.

Finally, congressional investigations involving the private sector and the White House may be further complicated by the Department of Justice’s recent Office of Legal Counsel opinion that states that the presidential communications component of executive privilege can protect certain communications between the President and/or his direct advisers and private advisers who do not work for the Executive Branch. As a practical matter, this development could create additional complexity for companies and executives that have communicated with the President or his close advisers, particularly if those communications later become the subject of congressional inquiries. In some cases, private actors may find themselves navigating competing legal, political, and institutional considerations as Congress seeks information that the Executive Branch may view as privileged. We recently analyzed this development here.

“Kitchen Table” Issues

Looking ahead to 2028, Democratic-led committees are also likely to prioritize so-called “kitchen table” issues, particularly those implicating affordability and economic fairness. This could include topics related to perceived rising costs, focusing on groceries, housing, utility and energy, healthcare, or agricultural inputs, as well as issues like insurance claim denials, interest on credit card debt or payday lending, tariff refunds, retail private credit, pension funds, or market concentration. Indeed, as mentioned above, House Minority Leader Jeffries has placed affordability at the center of House Democrats’ agenda, and Ranking Member Garcia has said that “larger corporations” will be a central focus of the Oversight Committee.

Committees are likely to examine perceived rising costs for household expenditures and may seek testimony and documents from a wide range of market participants as they evaluate drivers of consumer costs. Congressional inquiries could explore how businesses respond to inflationary pressures, supply-chain dynamics, changing market conditions, technological developments, and federal policy decisions that may affect consumers, including tariffs. Oversight may also focus on the growing use of data analytics, algorithmic tools, and AI in commercial decision-making, particularly as it relates to understanding the implications of such technologies for pricing, competition, transparency, or consumer outcomes. For example, in May 2026, House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) launched an inquiry into corporate pricing practices, sending letters to 25 companies, seeking information about the use of consumer data and related pricing methodologies.

Additionally, energy-related issues are also likely to remain part of the broader affordability discussion, particularly in light of geopolitical developments, the Trump Administration’s foreign policy agenda, and evolving domestic energy policy. For example, as energy demand from data centers, advanced computing, and other energy-intensive industries continues to grow, Congress may examine how the costs associated with grid expansion and large-scale infrastructure projects are allocated among stakeholders, including utilities, businesses, and consumers. Such inquiries are likely to focus on questions of transparency, reliability, and affordability. Indeed, Democratic members recently launched a “Congressional Lowering Utility Bills Caucus,” dedicated to “finding legislative solutions,” including oversight, to the “ongoing energy affordability crisis” and examining factors that may contribute to higher utility costs.

Technology Sector Oversight

Finally, in a Democratic Congress, oversight of technology companies will likely expand, with AI at the center. Congressional inquiries may explore a range of issues associated with AI adoption and deployment, including workforce impacts, the implications of automation for certain industries and employee populations, and the energy and infrastructure demands associated with AI development, as well as the environmental impacts. Lawmakers may also examine safety and national security considerations related to advanced AI models, as well as the use of AI in defense, intelligence, and law enforcement contexts. At the same time, child safety and youth well-being are likely to remain areas of bipartisan interest. Such scrutiny may extend beyond social media to AI-driven products and immersive platforms. 

Democrats may also target emerging financial technologies and digital markets, including prediction markets, betting platforms, and other novel financial products. Oversight in this area is likely to focus on questions relating to consumer protection, market integrity, transparency, and the adequacy of existing regulatory frameworks. Similarly, some Members may examine stablecoins and other digital assets as part of broader fintech oversight efforts, exploring issues such as consumer safeguards, financial stability, national security considerations, and the role of digital assets within the broader payments ecosystem. As these technologies continue to evolve, congressional inquiries will likely focus on understanding their economic, competitive, and regulatory implications while assessing whether existing legal and regulatory structures remain fit for purpose.

How to Prepare

Although there is no one-size-fits-all approach to congressional oversight, proactive preparation can reduce risk and provide more options for engagement with investigative committees. Companies can strengthen their posture in anticipation of potential oversight by taking the following steps:

• Assess and inventory potential issues that could incur scrutiny, including interactions with the U.S. government under both the prior and current Administrations, with particular attention to areas that may present heightened oversight risk;
• Conduct targeted reviews to ensure an understanding of the relevant facts and identify any appropriate risk mitigation steps;
• Relatedly, for companies whose executives have communicated with the President and/or his direct advisers, inside or outside the Administration, evaluate such communications to determine whether such communications are confidential and relate to official presidential decision-making such that there may be executive privilege considerations;
• Develop a crisis response playbook and a cross-functional rapid response team to guide seamless and efficient decision-making;
• Run tabletop exercises that simulate multi-forum crises, allowing the board and General Counsel to evaluate gaps in the company's rapid-response plans and assess coordination between internal legal, government relations, and communications teams;
• Assess relationships with stakeholders on the Hill and, where it makes sense, consider whether early engagement with committees or members can help position the company before an inquiry begins;
• Evaluate press strategies, including whether early engagement will allow the company to participate in shaping the narrative of any burgeoning inquiries; and
• Evaluate document retention and preservation practices.

Companies should expect a dynamic and wide-ranging congressional oversight agenda in 2027. Such oversight may present high-stakes, complex, and potentially unprecedented challenges, making productive engagement with congressional stakeholders and guidance from experienced congressional investigations counsel more important than ever. Companies that take early, strategic steps to understand and position their potential risk areas will be better equipped to navigate forthcoming inquiries.