Looking back at corporate enforcement during the Trump years reveals a complicated picture that's still unfolding today. Several major cases that began during that administration are only now coming to fruition - and they're raising eyebrows across the political spectrum.
FirstCash is currently facing serious allegations about illegal military lending practices - basically charging our service members excessive interest rates despite laws specifically prohibiting this. And then there's FirstEnergy, where executives have been indicted for RICO conspiracy (yes, the same law used against organized crime). These cases highlight how corporate misconduct often takes years to fully investigate and prosecute.
What I find particularly interesting - and concerning - is how political connections seemed to influence enforcement priorities. Take Ford Motor Company, for instance. They're under investigation for seat belt defects and labor violations, but it's hard not to notice their $199K donation to Trump's inaugural fund. Did that buy them time or leniency? It's difficult to prove direct correlation, but the appearance isn't great.
The Trump administration often touted its business-friendly approach to regulation, but in practice, this sometimes meant less oversight in areas where consumers and workers needed protection. I've spoken with former regulators who described a culture of reluctance to pursue certain types of corporate wrongdoing - especially when it involved companies with political connections.
That said, it would be an oversimplification to say enforcement completely disappeared. Some agencies maintained their independence and continued pursuing significant cases. The system is bigger than any one administration, though it can certainly be influenced.
As these cases continue to work through the courts, we'll get a clearer picture of this administration's legacy on corporate accountability. But one thing's for sure - the intersection of business interests and political power remains as complicated as ever.
