Five Democratic AG Wins Redraw the Legal Map for Big Tech

Democrats won five closely watched attorney general races in the midterms, and the biggest surprise landed in Texas: Nathan Johnson defeated Republican Mayes Middleton to become the state's first Democratic attorney general since 1994.

The blue wave that swept Democrats into control of both the House and Senate dealt a major blow to Donald Trump. But for the technology industry, a handful of state attorney general offices may prove just as consequential as anything happening in Washington.

In Arizona, incumbent Kris Mayes defeated Republican Warren Petersen. Wisconsin's Josh Kaul secured a third term. Michigan's Eli Savit beat Republican Doug Lloyd to succeed term-limited Democrat Dana Nessel, and Democrat Nicole Cannizzaro won Nevada's open seat.

Why does this matter for Big Tech?

Federal lawmakers have struggled to rein in the industry. State attorneys general have stepped into the vacuum, using investigations and lawsuits to force changes to products and practices nationwide. A change in leadership can bring an abrupt shift in enforcement priorities.

"State attorneys general have become the preeminent regulator and regulatory enforcer in the United States over the last 15 or 20 years," says Stephen Cobb, partner and vice chair of the state attorneys general practice at Foley & Lardner, a Washington, D.C., law firm. "We've seen state attorney generals from across the aisles having an increased focus on the technology industries generally," he adds.

Texas signals the sharpest turn. The state's attorney general's office has long ranked among the most influential Republican-led legal operations in the country, regularly spearheading multistate lawsuits. Johnson has promised to refocus the office on consumer protection rather than partisan political battles — a change that could reshape the coalitions bringing legal challenges against technology companies.

Arizona and Michigan matter too. Arizona has been a key participant in multistate actions targeting the industry, while Michigan has been "actively engaged in national consumer protection and technology matters," says Brandon J. Smith, partner at law firm Holtzman Vogel.

"A change in attorney general can mean a significant change in enforcement priorities almost overnight, even without a single change in the underlying law," Smith says.

Attorneys general already hold sweeping authority to investigate technology companies, Smith notes. "The technology industry sometimes underestimates just how much authority state attorneys general already possess," he says. Even without new AI-specific legislation, state AGs can investigate tech companies using existing consumer protection, unfair and deceptive practices, and antitrust laws.

Is a Democratic sweep automatically bad news for tech?

Not necessarily. The partisan dynamics of tech regulation run deeper than red versus blue.

Republican attorneys general have generally focused on issues such as alleged censorship and consumer safety. Democrats have leaned harder on privacy and algorithmic discrimination. But both parties have grown more aggressive in scrutinizing the industry, so a Republican victory wouldn't have guaranteed a friendlier regulatory environment either.

"Both parties increasingly view big tech as an industry requiring greater scrutiny," Smith says. "I don't think technology companies should interpret partisan disagreement as an indication that either side is going to leave them alone."

That bipartisan pressure shows up most clearly in efforts to protect children online. Josh Golin, executive director of the children's advocacy nonprofit Fairplay, points to state AG investigations and lawsuits involving Meta, TikTok, Snap, Discord, and Roblox. Those actions, he says, have pushed companies to change their products and introduce additional safety features. He expects the scrutiny to continue regardless of which party holds office, given the broad political concern over children's online safety.

What are the limits of regulating through litigation?

Tech companies are paying close attention. They're "definitely watching because attorneys general have shown that a single state enforcement can change how that national product works," says K.J. Bagchi, vice president of U.S. policy and government relations at the Chamber of Progress, a tech industry trade association.

But Bagchi argues that the focus on who occupies these offices obscures a larger problem: state attorneys general have become de facto tech regulators partly because lawmakers have failed to act.

"I would warn against a model where litigation is a substitute for legislation," he says. "Going after single companies is not necessarily the solution, but it is an understandable byproduct of seeing the legislative process in some states has fallen apart."

With five new Democratic AGs taking office and no federal tech legislation in sight, the courtroom — not Congress — will remain the industry's primary regulatory battleground.