White House Announces DOJ Division for National Fraud Enforcement

Key Takeaways

• DOJ is creating a new Division for National Fraud Enforcement with centralized priority-setting authority. The new Assistant Attorney General will oversee nationwide civil and criminal fraud priorities, coordinate multi-district investigations, and advise U.S. Attorneys’ Offices across sectors including healthcare and public benefits.
• Increased White House involvement may result in independence and process concerns from other parties. The Division’s reported oversight by the White House departs from long-standing DOJ norms limiting executive involvement in prosecutorial decisions, creating potential legal, privilege, and separation-of-powers issues.
• Early enforcement activity focuses on high-profile jurisdictions and federally funded programs. Initial signs suggest heightened scrutiny of public benefits, healthcare, and politically salient programs, particularly in jurisdictions attracting national attention.

What Is the DOJ’s New Division for National Fraud Enforcement?

The White House has announced the creation of a Department of Justice Division for National Fraud Enforcement, to be led by a new Assistant Attorney General with nationwide authority over civil and criminal fraud matters.¹ At a press conference announcing the new Division, Vice President JD Vance stated that the role will be “run out of the White House under the supervision of [the Vice President] and the President of the United States.”² That novel reporting structure raises immediate questions about how the new Division will interact with existing DOJ fraud components and long-standing norms intended to limit White House involvement in investigative and prosecutorial decision-making.

According to the White House fact sheet, the new Assistant Attorney General will be responsible for setting national fraud enforcement priorities, overseeing multi-district and multi-agency investigations, advising U.S. Attorneys’ Offices on fraud matters, and recommending legislative and regulatory reforms to address systemic vulnerabilities. The Vice President indicated that a nomination for the post is imminent and that early enforcement attention is expected to focus on public benefits programs, healthcare, and complex schemes targeting private victims.

Early Enforcement Signals and Jurisdiction Focus

Early signals regarding geographic focus may be instructive. The White House materials place notable emphasis on developments in Minnesota, suggesting that the Division may initially direct resources toward jurisdictions and issues receiving heightened public and media scrutiny more broadly. Companies should anticipate the possibility that near-term enforcement activity may concentrate on jurisdictions or sectors that attract national attention, particularly where allegations of fraud intersect with federal funding and politically salient programs.

How the New Division Fits Within DOJ’s Existing Fraud Enforcement Framework

The announcement also raises important questions regarding how the new Division will fit within DOJ’s existing fraud enforcement structure. The DOJ Criminal Division already leads nationwide criminal fraud prosecutions through its Fraud Section, while the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section drives False Claims Act and other civil fraud enforcement. Nothing in the announcement suggests that these existing components will be dissolved or stripped of core jurisdiction. Instead, the new Division appears designed to centralize priority-setting; enhance interdistrict coordination; and provide surge capacity for complex, multi-agency investigations, rather than to displace established prosecutorial authorities.

At the same time, the reporting structure described by the administration has not yet been reconciled with long-standing DOJ policies governing communications between the Department and the White House. DOJ has historically maintained restrictions on such communications to safeguard prosecutorial independence and public confidence in enforcement decisions. Depending on how the new Division is implemented, companies facing inquiries may need to consider potential issues related to privilege, separation of powers, and the legal durability of directives that reflect enhanced White House involvement in enforcement coordination.

Open Questions and Practical Implications

Key open questions remain, including the scope of the new Division’s formal authority over existing DOJ components, whether case intake and oversight will be centralized at Main Justice or continue to flow primarily through U.S. Attorneys’ Offices with enhanced coordination, how any White House-directed interagency tasking will be documented and operationalized, and the Division’s longer-term enforcement priorities. The nomination and confirmation process for the Assistant Attorney General will likely provide the first meaningful insight into the Division’s priorities, structure, and enforcement posture.

AGG will continue to monitor these developments closely, including confirmation proceedings, early enforcement initiatives, and any formal guidance clarifying reporting lines and coordination mechanisms. We will advise clients on the evolving fraud enforcement landscape, practical implications for investigations and litigation strategy, and steps companies can take to assess compliance readiness in light of potential shifts in national enforcement priorities.

[1] Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Establishes New Department of Justice Division for National Fraud Enforcement, The White House (Jan. 8, 2026), https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/01/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-establishes-new-department-of-justice-division-for-national-fraud-enforcement/.

[2] “White House Daily Briefing.” C-SPAN, White House Press Secretary & Cabinet Members Hold Briefing, 6 Jan. 2026, https://www.c-span.org/program/white-house-event/white-house-daily-briefing/671364.