On September 24, 2026, Invariant and WilmerHale hosted an in-person discussion on navigating congressional oversight in the next Congress at WilmerHale’s offices in Washington, D.C. 

Panelists included:

• Caroline Nabity, Chief Counsel for Oversight for the House Judiciary Committee (majority);
• Will McAuliffe, Chief Oversight Counsel for the House Energy and Commerce Committee (minority);
• Alyssa DaCunha, Partner and Co-Chair of WilmerHale’s Congressional Investigations Practice and Crisis Management and Strategic Response Group;
• Joel Green, Deputy Managing Partner and Co-Chair of WilmerHale’s Congressional Investigations Practice;
• Kerry Bollerman, Counsel in WilmerHale’s Congressional Investigations Practice;
• Susan Lagana, Vice President of Communications at Invariant; and
• David Weinberg, Principal of Oversight and Investigations at Invariant.

With the midterm elections approaching and a new Congress set to convene in January, the discussion focused on what companies can expect and how they can prepare in what is anticipated to be an active oversight environment. Topics included how congressional committees identify and pursue investigations, what constitutes effective engagement on oversight, how a recent U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion on executive privilege may affect oversight targets, and the optimal internal structures and coordination for organizations to respond effectively to oversight. This article highlights key takeaways from the discussion and identifies practical steps organizations can take to prepare before the next Congress begins.

Investigations Continue During Recess

Although Congress remains out of session until after the midterm elections, committee staff remain active. As they wrap up current investigations, organizations should expect final requests for documents or testimony, as well as committee reports memorializing investigative findings.

Panelists noted that committees have strong incentives to conclude their investigations before the next Congress begins in January, and an end-of-session investigative report can shape public and policymaker perceptions long after the inquiry closes. Current Republican-led investigations may not end with this Congress—if Republicans maintain control of the Senate, some inquiries could continue through Senate investigations. Additionally, investigations could continue via executive branch, state attorneys general, or minority investigations. At the same time, letters and requests from the Democratic minority provide insight into the investigative priorities committees may pursue if Democrats gain control of either chamber. Organizations should treat current or lame-duck requests as an early indicator of the oversight agenda of a potential Democratic majority.

Committee Investigative Priorities

Panelists noted that congressional oversight is often focused on areas where members believe harm may be occurring or where there may be a perceived gap in enforcement or accountability. Changes in executive branch enforcement priorities can create additional oversight exposure, as committees seek to fill what they view as a regulatory or enforcement vacuum. This dynamic can be particularly pronounced during periods of divided government, when Congress and the executive branch may have different policy priorities and approaches to oversight.

Panelists also agreed that affordability and accountability are likely to be central themes for both parties in the next Congress. Companies whose products, pricing, or business practices affect consumers’ everyday costs (the so-called “kitchen table issues”) may receive attention regardless of which party controls either chamber.

Engaging With Committee Staff

Panelists offered practical advice on engaging with committee staff:

• Negotiate in good faith. Working with staff to identify the information that best answers an inquiry’s core questions can reduce a company’s burden while building credibility.
• Think long term. Congressional majorities change, and relationships built during one Congress often carry forward into the next. As committee leadership evolves, a company’s conduct in responding to one inquiry can influence how it is viewed and treated in future oversight engagements.
• Engage proactively, but only when prepared. Proactive engagement with congressional committees, such as an informational briefing, can be beneficial, but timing and preparation matter. Organizations that engage before developing the facts risk providing incomplete or inaccurate information, which can erode credibility and invite further scrutiny.
• Understand the tools. Committees have a range of oversight tools at their disposal, including requests for information, transcribed interviews, depositions, and subpoenas. In practice, however, a phone call from committee staff is often the first and most important step in assessing an issue. Whether and how to engage should be guided by your team’s assessment of the circumstances, including whether engagement could increase oversight exposure or risk. When warranted, a thoughtful, accurate, and responsive engagement at that stage can address concerns early and, in some cases, prevent a matter from escalating into a formal investigation.

Executive Branch Coordination and the OLC Opinion

As is the case prior to a potential change of control in either chamber, the Executive Branch is likely preparing for incoming congressional inquiries. The White House plays a central role in formulating and coordinating oversight strategy across the Executive Branch, typically working closely with agency oversight counsel. That coordination may take on added significance following the recent OLC opinion, which stated that the presidential communications component of executive privilege can protect confidential communications between the president or his direct advisers and private advisers who do not work for the Executive Branch when those communications relate to official presidential decision-making. The practical effect of the opinion remains to be seen, but it could affect future negotiations over congressional access to a wide range of communications, including memoranda, emails, text messages, and conversations with private-sector executives.

Whether executive privilege extends to private advisers has not been tested in litigation. Panelists observed that organizations that communicated with the White House on policy issues may find themselves in the middle of a separation-of-powers clash if the White House takes the position that those communications are protected by executive privilege. As a result, companies that have engaged with the White House may benefit from understanding which personnel have communicated with the president or his direct advisers, as well as the nature and scope of those communications.

Potential Steps to Prepare

Organizations are best positioned to respond to congressional oversight when they invest in preparing before an inquiry arrives. Panelists highlighted several practical measures that companies can take to enhance their oversight readiness:

• Build a coordinated cross-functional team. Government relations, legal, and communications teams each play a distinct role—engaging stakeholders, developing the facts and assessing legal exposure, and advancing the company’s affirmative narrative. These teams should work from a single, verified set of facts within a clear decision-making structure, so the organization speaks with one voice.
• Recognize oversight as both a legal challenge and a communications exercise. Once an inquiry begins, establishing a thorough understanding of the facts and the issues of interest to the committee can help organizations develop a thoughtful and effective response strategy. 
• Develop a 48-hour plan. A plan prepared in advance allows organizations to promptly assess the scope of a request, convene the appropriate stakeholders, develop an initial understanding of the relevant facts, and ensure that external communications are coordinated and informed. 
• Assign ownership and identify external advisers. Clarify ownership of key workstreams and decision-making responsibilities in advance, while ensuring that outside counsel, government relations, and communications advisers can be engaged quickly if needed.
• Conduct internal fact development. Proactive fact development can help organizations assess potential areas of risk and allow them to respond more effectively and confidently.
• Prepare for known risk areas and conduct scenario planning with leadership. Advance planning may include developing key messages for topics likely to draw congressional attention and conducting scenario-based exercises, such as tabletop exercises, to familiarize executives with the oversight process.

Conclusion

The next Congress is likely to bring robust oversight activity. Committee staff are already identifying priorities, the Executive Branch is preparing for increased scrutiny, and recent legal developments may shape how certain investigations unfold. Organizations that take the time now to understand potential areas of interest, establish clear response processes, and build constructive relationships with congressional stakeholders will be better positioned to navigate that environment.