s from the Top: Inside the Trump 2.0 Enforcement Playbook

On September 4, 2025, the Northern District of California's top federal enforcement leaders came together to discuss their agencies' evolving priorities - and how they will play out in practice - in the 16^th annual "Views from the Top" program.¹ Moderated by Hartley M.K. West, Dechert LLP's Global Co-Chair of Enforcement and Investigations, this year's panel featured Northern California's new U.S. Attorney, Craig Missakian; Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Associate Director of Enforcement, Jason Lee; and Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division Chief, Leslie Wulff.

The panel revealed three consistent themes: individual accountability, sharp resource triage, and recalibrated focus toward national security and emerging risks.

U.S. Attorney Craig Missakian: Security and Intent

Missakian outlined a prosecutorial playbook that he explained aims to blend Trump-era priorities with Silicon Valley realities.

National security first: Missakian underscored that national security - broadly defined to encompass economic security - is now a top prosecutorial priority. Prosecutions for theft of trade secrets tied to China, cartel activity at the border, and terrorism-linked financial flows illustrate the national security lens cutting across traditional white-collar categories.

Crypto crime, not crypto regulation: Moving away from what critics often derided in past eras as "regulation by enforcement" and softening crackdowns on crypto market structure, Missakian said the U.S. Attorney's Office will remain aggressive against fraud, money laundering, and illicit use of digital assets.

Intent is king: Regarding public welfare and other regulatory offenses, Missakian underscored what he described as a common-sense approach: accidental violations of strict liability laws should not be criminalized. But willful misconduct, such as illegal dumping of waste, will face full prosecution.

Individuals over entities: While prior administrations touted individual accountability, the DOJ in Trump 2.0 has articulated a policy approach that emphasizes minimizing unnecessary burdens on corporations that punish risk-taking, hinder innovation, and cause harm to shareholders, employees and pensioners. Executives and managers are enforcement's bullseye, a shift intended to deter misconduct without stifling corporate activity.

SEC's Jason Lee: Back to Basics, Plus AI

For the SEC, Lee sketched a leaner, back-to-basics enforcement shift centered on fraud, fiduciary breaches, and insider trading.

Policing "AI washing" and tech hype: Companies overhyping AI capabilities are in the SEC's crosshairs, with its administrative order against investment adviser Delphia (USA) Inc. for inaccurately representing its use of AI as an early example. Expect more scrutiny at the intersection of investor hype and emerging technology.

Foundational enforcement: Expect insider trading, market manipulation, and fiduciary breaches to dominate. Such bread and butter cases have long been a priority. As with the U.S. Attorney's Office, the agency will avoid "regulation by enforcement" and charging technical violations.

Structural shakeup and transparency: Lee described structural reforms inside the SEC as accelerating enforcement, with the elimination of regional directors streamlining oversight under a unified national enforcement leadership. Paired with expanded transparency around Wells notices (if you request a meeting, you are apparently now more likely to get one), Lee believes SEC investigations will move faster and more fairly, with the new procedural openness making it easier to see when one is in the strike zone.

Resource triage: Cases will be prioritized based on egregiousness of misconduct and actual investor harm; technical violations are unlikely to make the cut. Only high-impact, high-harm cases are moving forward.

DOJ Antitrust's Leslie Wulff: Collusion and Deterrence

For the DOJ Antitrust Division, Leslie Wulff signaled aggressive criminal enforcement.

Cartel crackdowns: From Mexican border rigging to wage-fixing convictions, the Antitrust Division is squarely focused on criminal prosecutions tied to consumer harm and taxpayer funds. As with the U.S. Attorney's priorities, Wulff's antitrust portfolio carried a security-inflected orientation. By making cartel cases and bid-rigging prosecutions a priority - including those impacting taxpayer funds - the Division is situating its mission in terms of preserving the integrity of competitive markets as a bulwark against broader instability.

Labor markets in play: Collusion in hiring and wage-fixing remains a live enforcement target. After several labor market cases following its 2016 policy signaling criminal enforcement, this April the Division secured its first conviction in the wage-fixing case in United States v. Lopez.

Whistleblower channels: The Division is exploring creative tools to support enforcement, including a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Postal Service designed to encourage whistleblower reporting of unlawful behavior tied to federal contracting. This collaboration means companies should assume regulators will hear about collusion faster than ever.

Jail time talks: Noting that incarceration is the most effective deterrent, Wulff signaled less willingness for the Division to accept arguments for home detention.

The Bottom Line

• Individuals, not institutions. Enforcers prefer to target executives or employees, not the companies they represent, particularly if the companies demonstrate good-faith compliance and cooperation.
• National security dominates DOJ's docket. From cybercrime and trade secret theft to cartel activity and terrorism links, security risks are driving enforcement priorities.
• AI and emerging technology remain under active scrutiny for fraud and misleading disclosures.
• The Antitrust Division continues aggressive cartel prosecutions, with labor-market collusion (wage-fixing and no-poach agreements) remaining an enforcement focus.
• Both DOJ and SEC are managing stretched resources by seeking to prioritize deterrence through high-visibility, high-harm cases.