Featured Stories
Va. A.G. Jones Secures Landmark $2.25 Million Settlement Against Discriminatory Landlord
RICHMOND, Virginia, July 17 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Jay Jones Secures Landmark $2.25 Million Settlement Against Discriminatory Landlord
The OAG's Office of Civil Rights Achieves Justice for Hampton Roads Tenants
-
Attorney General Jones is proud to announce the Office of Civil Rights' historic settlement in a fair housing case brought against David Merryman, a notorious landlord in Newport News and Norfolk who is already serving 17 years in prison for wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and race-based
... Show Full Article
RICHMOND, Virginia, July 17 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Jay Jones Secures Landmark $2.25 Million Settlement Against Discriminatory Landlord
The OAG's Office of Civil Rights Achieves Justice for Hampton Roads Tenants
-
Attorney General Jones is proud to announce the Office of Civil Rights' historic settlement in a fair housing case brought against David Merryman, a notorious landlord in Newport News and Norfolk who is already serving 17 years in prison for wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and race-basedinterference with housing and employment. The court found that for years, Merryman harassed and abused his tenants by calling them racist, sexist, and homophobic epithets, refusing to complete basic repairs to make their homes habitable, evicting tenants who requested those basic repairs, and, in some cases, even threatening violence to tenants who simply requested that Merryman fulfill his legal duties as a landlord.
Attorney General Jones has put an end to this abhorrent situation, and secured relief for those who were victimized as part of a landmark settlement. This huge win comes two years after Merryman was sentenced to federal prison for fraud and discriminatory practices. The terms of the settlement are sweeping and order the following of Merryman:
* He can never be a landlord in the Commonwealth again.
* He must sell all of his rental properties in Virginia within a year.
* He must work with the courts to eliminate millions of dollars of eviction filings and judgments from the records of his past tenants. This action removes a serious barrier for tenants to obtain housing.
* He must pay a monetary settlement of $2,250,000, which will be used to compensate tenants who were victims of his discriminatory behavior.
"Our friends, neighbors, communities, and families have the right to be treated with respect and dignity throughout the housing process, as guaranteed by the Virginia Fair Housing Law and the Fair Housing Act. Anyone found in violation of these laws will be held accountable by this office and justice will be achieved for tenants who face discrimination," said Attorney General Jones. "We are in a new era of civil rights enforcement in the Commonwealth. Returning this office to the people means returning energy and talent to the cases that went neglected far too long. The attorneys who first brought this case to court under my predecessor, former Attorney General Mark Herring -- Helen Hardiman and Palmer Heenan -- are back in this office leading efforts to safeguard the civil rights of all Virginians. Discriminatory harassment has no place in our Commonwealth and will play no role in the future we are creating for those who come after us."
"I was honored to rejoin the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia under Attorney General Jones' leadership," said Deputy Attorney General Helen Hardiman. "When he created the new Public Advocacy Division, AG Jones made clear that we are here to vigorously enforce people's rights. I still viscerally remember the horror stories of Merryman's tenants who we interviewed when we first opened this case in 2021. I hope they finally feel vindicated. This settlement is a testament to the hard work of attorneys in the Office of Civil Rights and the willingness of the Attorney General to bring the full resources of the Office to bear to stamp out housing discrimination."
"Today's settlement holds Merryman accountable; requiring him to admit that he discriminated against his tenants, abused his tenants, and called them horrific racist, sexist, and homophobic slurs. Justice has come. He can never again harm a tenant in the Commonwealth," said Section Chief Palmer Heenan. "The extent of the trauma and abuse his tenants faced cannot be understated. Having been involved in this case from the start, I am grateful to have helped impacted tenants achieve long-awaited justice."
If you believe your housing rights have been violated, you have options:
* File a complaint within one year with the Virginia Fair Housing Office or your local fair housing agency.
* File a lawsuit in court within two years of the last discriminatory act.
To read the full Consent Decree, click here (https://itsm-mailers.samanage.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.oag.state.va.us%2Ffiles%2FConsent_Decree_Signed.pdf/1/0100019f6ca64ad1-a0e39fc4-f55a-4e05-bac7-4b5c8c617651-000000/vnJd_bp2oP-zzGgWJ0S5UU31iS4U_vsQtEXnWtrN8d4=452).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.oag.state.va.us/media-center/news-releases/3078-attorney-general-jay-jones-secures-landmark-2-25-million-settlement-against-discriminatory-landlord
Statement From Md. A.G. Brown Following President Trump's Speech on U.S. Elections
BALTIMORE, Maryland, July 17 -- Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown issued the following statement on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Statement from Attorney General Brown Following President Trump's Speech on U.S. Elections
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown today issued the following statement on President Donald Trump's speech concerning United States elections:
"Tonight, President Trump used a national address to make broad claims about the integrity of our elections that risk undermining public confidence in our democratic process.
Marylanders should know that our state's elections are conducted
... Show Full Article
BALTIMORE, Maryland, July 17 -- Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown issued the following statement on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Statement from Attorney General Brown Following President Trump's Speech on U.S. Elections
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown today issued the following statement on President Donald Trump's speech concerning United States elections:
"Tonight, President Trump used a national address to make broad claims about the integrity of our elections that risk undermining public confidence in our democratic process.
Marylanders should know that our state's elections are conductedsecurely, fairly, and in accordance with the law.
"When Marylanders cast their ballots, they can trust that their votes will be counted accurately and that their voices will be heard.
The right to participate in our democracy and choose our leaders belongs to the people of Maryland, and my Office will continue to defend that right."
* * *
Original text here: https://oag.maryland.gov/News/pages/Statement-from-Attorney-General-Brown-Following-President-Trump%e2%80%99s-Speech-on-U.S.-Elections.aspx
S.D. A.G. Jackley Statement on Mayday Health Federal District Court Injunction
PIERRE, South Dakota, July 17 -- South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley issued the following statement:
* * *
Attorney General Marty Jackley Statement on Mayday Health Federal District Court Injunction
South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley issued this statement on the U.S. District Court's preliminary injunction in the Mayday Health lawsuit.
Mayday's lawsuit challenges a South Dakota law prohibiting advertising for abortion pills in South Dakota, and advertising on behalf of out-of-state suppliers who will ship abortion pills to South Dakota in violation of state law.
"We have received
... Show Full Article
PIERRE, South Dakota, July 17 -- South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley issued the following statement:
* * *
Attorney General Marty Jackley Statement on Mayday Health Federal District Court Injunction
South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley issued this statement on the U.S. District Court's preliminary injunction in the Mayday Health lawsuit.
Mayday's lawsuit challenges a South Dakota law prohibiting advertising for abortion pills in South Dakota, and advertising on behalf of out-of-state suppliers who will ship abortion pills to South Dakota in violation of state law.
"We have receivedthe federal district court's preliminary injunction during the ongoing proceedings.
While we respectfully disagree, the case on the permanent injunction will still be tried with additional discovery and information about Mayday's activities and representations.
Protecting and defending innocent life is and remains important to our Legislature, Governor, Attorney General and citizens."
* * *
Original text here: https://atg.sd.gov/OurOffice/Media/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?id=3117
Okla. A.G. Drummond Launches Investigation Into Medicaid Fraud Failures
OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma, July 17 -- Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Drummond launches investigation into Medicaid fraud failures
Attorney General Gentner Drummond announced today that his office has opened an investigation into the Oklahoma Health Care Authority's (OHCA) handling of alleged fraud, waste and abuse within the state's Medicaid managed care program. This new investigation follows recent revelations that OHCA leadership hand-picked by Gov. Stitt failed to report a large-scale, foreign-based enrollment fraud scheme.
... Show Full Article
OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma, July 17 -- Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
Drummond launches investigation into Medicaid fraud failures
Attorney General Gentner Drummond announced today that his office has opened an investigation into the Oklahoma Health Care Authority's (OHCA) handling of alleged fraud, waste and abuse within the state's Medicaid managed care program. This new investigation follows recent revelations that OHCA leadership hand-picked by Gov. Stitt failed to report a large-scale, foreign-based enrollment fraud scheme.
"Medicaid exists to protect Oklahoma's most vulnerable residents, not to become a target for international fraud rings," said Drummond. "When my office is not notified in a timely manner that thousands of fraudulent accounts were opened inside our state's Medicaid program by foreign actors, that's not a paperwork failure. It's a breakdown in OHCA administration."
Under federal regulation, the state contract can either require Medicaid managed care entities (MCEs) to report suspected fraud to OHCA's Program Integrity Unit or to the Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU). Gov. Stitt and OHCA chose to have suspected fraud reported first to OHCA with the option for them to refer cases to the Attorney General's office, potentially resulting in countless cases going uninvestigated.
Gov. Stitt's administration and his leadership team at OHCA failed, sending only two of MCFU's 168 fraud referrals in Fiscal Year 2025. Of the 509 fraud referrals received by MFCU during FYs 2022-2024, only 11 originated from OHCA.
"My office has continuously called on OHCA to review its controls, increase referrals, inform my office about unclean claims or fraudulent activity," Drummond said.
Today's investigation comes after Drummond's office learned that a criminal group believed to originate from a foreign country exploited weaknesses in OHCA's eligibility process during open enrollment, potentially allowing thousands of fraudulent Medicaid enrollments into the program. All three of the state's managed care entities are reportedly affected.
None of this suspicious activity had been reported to the Attorney General's office by OHCA.
The revelation follows numerous warnings from Drummond to OHCA leadership. Most recently, in a March 26 letter, Drummond pressed the authority on persistent provider complaints about payment delays and claims denials, writing that "if unclean claims or fraud are contributing to these failures, identify them and act. But inaction -- for any reason -- is reckless and unconscionable." OHCA's April 10 response detailed claims-processing and prior authorization statistics but did not address fraud.
"OHCA was armed with all the tools they needed to fight fraud. Instead, it stayed silent while thousands of suspected fraudulent Medicaid enrollments went unreported," said Drummond. "Oklahomans expect their Medicaid dollars to protect vulnerable patients, not to fund an organized fraud operation that nobody at OHCA thought to bring to the attention of law enforcement."
This investigation builds on Drummond's April request for an audit of OHCA through the Office of the State Auditor and Inspector.
Oklahomans who received a Medicaid enrollment packet they did not request may have had their identity used as part of this scheme. Individuals who believe they were affected are encouraged to submit an online Medicaid Enrollment Fraud Report. Reporting does not mean a person is under investigation. The reports help the Attorney General's office identify victims and gather more information.
* * *
Original text here: https://oklahoma.gov/oag/news/newsroom/2026/july/drummond-launches-investigation-into-medicaid-fraud-failures.html
Lancaster County District Court Prohibits the City of Lincoln from Enforcing Unconstitutional Minimum Wage Ordinance
LINCOLN, Nebraska, July 17 -- Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers issued the following news release:
* * *
Lancaster County District Court Prohibits the City of Lincoln from Enforcing Unconstitutional Minimum Wage Ordinance
*
Today, the Lancaster County District Court stopped the City of Lincoln from enforcing its unconstitutional minimum-wage ordinance. The Court concluded that the State's arguments are "strong enough that the Ordinance should be enjoined until the merits are fully litigated."
In 2026, the Nebraska Legislature amended the State's Wage and Hour Act to set the growth rate
... Show Full Article
LINCOLN, Nebraska, July 17 -- Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers issued the following news release:
* * *
Lancaster County District Court Prohibits the City of Lincoln from Enforcing Unconstitutional Minimum Wage Ordinance
*
Today, the Lancaster County District Court stopped the City of Lincoln from enforcing its unconstitutional minimum-wage ordinance. The Court concluded that the State's arguments are "strong enough that the Ordinance should be enjoined until the merits are fully litigated."
In 2026, the Nebraska Legislature amended the State's Wage and Hour Act to set the growth ratefor the minimum wage and to allow employers to pay youth employees a distinct minimum wage. The Lincoln City Council apparently disagreed with the balance the Legislature struck and enacted a municipal ordinance directly at odds with State law.
The Legislature said the minimum-wage growth rate "shall" be 1.75%; the City's ordinance would modify that statute to say "shall not" and sets the growth rate at a different level. Similarly, the Legislature said that employers "may" pay youth employees a minimum wage of $13 per hour; the City's ordinance effectively rewrites that law to say "may not" and instead requires employers to pay youth employees $15 per hour.
"I appreciate the Court's thoughtful consideration here," stated Attorney General Mike Hilgers. "The injunction stops the City's unlawful ordinance and its illegal attempt to circumvent the Constitution."
Contrary to the City's arguments, the Court concluded that "the minimum wage is likely a matter of statewide concern." Further, the State "will be irreparably harmed if the Ordinance contradicts state law." The Court therefore enjoined the City from enforcing its ordinance "until further order of the Court."
As the State continues to litigate the case, the Court's order will prevent the City of Lincoln from enforcing its ordinance. The Legislature's 2026 amendments to the Wage and Hour Act will remain the law across the State-including within the City of Lincoln.
***
Original text here: https://ago.nebraska.gov/lancaster-county-district-court-prohibits-city-lincoln-enforcing-unconstitutional-minimum-wage
Ill. A.G. Raoul, 19 Co-Signers Issue Letter to Comptroller of the Currency, FDIC, Fed
CHICAGO, Illinois, July 17 (TNSletter) -- Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, with 19 co-signers issued the following letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Reserve and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency:
* * *
Here is the text of the letter:
July 15, 2026
The Honorable Jonathan Gould
Comptroller
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
400 7th St., SW Suite 1E-216
Washington, DC 20219
-
The Honorable Kevin Warsh
Chairman
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20551
-
The Honorable Travis
... Show Full Article
CHICAGO, Illinois, July 17 (TNSletter) -- Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, with 19 co-signers issued the following letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Reserve and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency:
* * *
Here is the text of the letter:
July 15, 2026
The Honorable Jonathan Gould
Comptroller
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
400 7th St., SW Suite 1E-216
Washington, DC 20219
-
The Honorable Kevin Warsh
Chairman
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20551
-
The Honorable TravisHill
Chairman
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th Street NW
Washington, DC 20429
-
Dear Comptroller Gould, Chairman Warsh, and Chairman Hill,
We, the undersigned Attorneys General, write to raise our serious concerns about the possibility of granting bank privileges to high-cost lenders and other nontraditional entities without adequate safeguards to protect consumers, investors, and the financial system.
In the past year, there has been an increase in both online lenders moving beyond bank partnerships and seeking to become banks themselves, and fintech companies applying to enter the banking system, including cryptocurrency exchanges and payment platforms. Approval of these charters would mark an undeniable shift in the types of entities that enter our national banking system, and it should be cause for alarm. Some of these companies engage in high-risk practices that threaten both consumers and the stability of the financial system. Two such applicants have a history of lending at triple-digit interest rates in violation of state laws. They now seek to become national banks with the ability to circumvent state interest rate limits and other state consumer protections. Allowing such companies into the national banking system without guardrails empowers and incentivizes predatory lending and needlessly leaves consumers vulnerable to harm.
As state enforcers, we are often the first line of defense and have historically detected dangers to consumers and the financial system before the full extent of the harm came to fruition. We sounded the alarm about subprime mortgages well in advance of the 2008 financial crisis because we saw first-hand the types of unsustainable loans being made in our states. Now, we sound the alarm again. As the regulators that manage national bank charters, bank holding companies, and deposit insurance, you collectively determine who is allowed access to national banking privileges and what responsibilities and conditions they must meet. We urge you to prohibit such access to entities that have a track record of brazenly attempting to evade state law and disregarding consumer protections.
I. Granting National Bank Privileges to Predatory Lenders Severely Erodes State Autonomy and Consumer Protections.
Nearly every state in the union has long sought to protect its residents from high-interest lending. Forty-five states and D.C. have interest rate caps on small to mid-size installment loans; 36% is a widely accepted maximum rate for very small loans, with lower maximum rates for larger loans.1 This unequivocally demonstrates the will of the people -- regardless of political party -- to prevent unaffordable lending. These laws are in place to help ensure that borrowers can afford to repay their loans. In their absence -- or when preempted -- lenders are free to engage in riskier lending without regard for consumers' ability to repay the loan by using excessively high interest rates to ensure they can still profit even if the borrower defaults.2
Some high-cost lenders often evade state interest rate caps by relying on rent-a-bank schemes. For instance, Enova and OppFi each currently partner with banks that are chartered primarily in states with no interest rate caps and offer loans with interest rates reaching 195% and beyond.3 These arrangements are deliberate efforts to avoid state usury laws and to extract profit from those that are in desperate need of money. Rent-a-bank schemes, however, do not provide guaranteed avoidance of state laws as these arrangements can be challenged.4 To avoid any challenge and have full access to national banking privileges, these very lenders are now seeking national bank charters, which would allow them to lend across the country without any interest rate caps and without the need for rent-a-bank partnerships and the legal hurdles that accompany them.
Federal supervision and enforcement are no substitute for state interest rate limits, which are the most effective way to protect consumers from unfair, abusive, and unaffordable loans in the absence of a national interest rate cap. By acquiring national banks, high-cost lenders would succeed in unlocking the benefits of the national banking system for the express purpose of expanding their predatory lending strategies to the national stage and circumventing the interest rate caps of 45 states and D.C. Granting these companies' applications would not only reward the outright evasion of state laws and hinder states' abilities to protect their consumers, but it would also invite other high-cost lenders to seek their own bank mergers -- or form rent-a-bank arrangements with these newly chartered banks to spawn even more predatory lending schemes.
Granting national bank privileges to predatory fintechs would also irreparably harm consumers. These kinds of lenders specifically target the financially vulnerable and further trap them in cycles of debt. They market high-interest products to borrowers with damaged credit.5 Loans are extended despite borrowers' inability to repay, and as a result, borrowers frequently refinance and default.6 This is built into the business model -- due to the high interest rates charged, lenders recoup the initial loan amount quickly and sufficiently profit even when extraordinarily high portions of borrowers ultimately default.7 Lenders walk away profiting from those they know are financially desperate, and borrowers end up owing more in interest and fees alone than what they initially borrowed. Consumers are further entrenched in a cycle of high-cost borrowing, exacerbating their financial instability and the corrosive stress of debt. Allowing high-cost fintech lenders to become national banks would lead to more consumers becoming burdened with unaffordable loans while simultaneously crippling our ability to enforce the state laws intended to protect consumers from these debt traps.
II. Granting Charters to High-Cost Lenders and Emerging Nontraditional Companies Endangers Safety and Soundness and the Stability of the Financial Marketplace.
Expanding banking privileges to high-cost lenders not only undercuts consumer protections and state laws but also is fundamentally inconsistent with principles of safe and sound banking. Bank acquisitions like those proposed by Enova and OppFi would convert a nonbank, high-cost lender into a national bank and a bank holding company. The role of the prudential regulators is paramount in ensuring the safety and soundness of the U.S. banking system. Regulators are tasked with determining the risk posed to consumers and the financial system in their assessment of whether companies like Enova and OppFi should be allowed to enter the banking ecosystem.8 Enova and OppFi's history of high-cost lending and flagrant efforts to evade applicable laws render such applications inconsistent with the standard for approval under the law and approving them would undermine the integrity of the national banking system.
As noted above, high-cost fintech lenders like Enova and OppFi do not adequately ensure that borrowers have the ability to repay their loans. Consequently, they have high default and chargeoff rates. Enova has charge-off rates over 50%.9 Charge-off rates anywhere close to that level have never been tolerated in a national bank.
Currently, high-cost rent-a-bank loans are issued by a small number of FDIC-supervised banks primarily chartered in states without interest rate limits. Losses on loans made by lenders renting state bank charters are over 25 times higher than bank credit cards,10 raising serious questions about whether high-cost lenders like Enova and OppFi could fulfill national bank charter obligations if they are allowed to become national banks themselves. For example, the FDIC's Standards for Safety and Soundness require banks to "establish and maintain prudent credit underwriting practices," "make an informed lending decision and to assess risk," and "assess the ability of the borrower to repay the indebtedness in a timely manner."11 Annual loss rates over 50% suggest that it would be difficult for such a lender to operate "in a safe and sound manner" required by federal banking rules,12 yet Enova and OppFi, with the help of their statechartered bank partners, are making loans with such high losses today. Similarly, these highdefault products -- which are the core of these companies' business models -- plainly cannot be reconciled with the prudential regulators' 2020 Interagency Lending Principles for Offering Responsible Small-Dollar Loans, which provide that, "[r]esponsible small-dollar loan programs generally reflect . . . [a] high percentage of customers successfully repaying . . . in accordance with original loan terms, which is a key indicator of affordability . . . and appropriate underwriting."13
In addition to charter applications from high-cost lenders, we are also alarmed by the extension of banking privileges to cryptocurrency firms and other emerging platforms. National trust charters and industrial loan charters should not be used as a regulatory shortcut to avoid state laws and state supervision while sidestepping the responsibilities and protections of traditional bank charters, including systemic risk management and regulatory oversight. Such expansion will amplify risk and instability to the financial system by embedding these risky business models into the fabric of the financial system. It will also trigger a race to the bottom, incentivizing other institutions to seek similar arrangements and threatening to destabilize the entire financial system.
Banking charters come with enormous privileges and benefits, including access to federal payments rails, the discount window, and emergency credit facilities, as well as exemption from certain state law protections. Opening the door to such benefits without corresponding safeguards exacerbates the excessive risk and experimentation of these entities and puts consumers and the banking system in danger. It also inappropriately broadens what constitutes a "bank" and undermines the credibility of the banking system. It is questionable whether many of these companies could meet the standards required by federal law for a traditional bank charter, including the threshold requirements to operate in a safe and sound manner, maintain sufficient capital, sustain profitability, and have a robust compliance management system that adequately identifies risks and ensures that the company is complying with its legal obligations. Further, allowing companies with higher risk profiles -- such as companies issuing stablecoins that could scale to trillions of dollars or offering new risky financial products -- to access banking privileges while avoiding the obligations that justify such privileges, introduces systemic risk without the corresponding safeguards, deposit insurance, or resolution mechanisms that protect consumers and the market when traditional banks fail.
Approving these charters prevents states from enforcing certain critical state-level consumer protections but also permits these entities to hold themselves out to the public as banks and benefit from the privileges and trust reserved for banks without the corresponding responsibilities. Traditional banks with community reinvestment programs, robust compliance infrastructures, and comprehensive consumer protections may also face a competitive disadvantage when compared to companies operating under an alternative charter while enjoying comparable market credibility.
While streamlining, efficiency, and innovation are important goals, it is critical that our federal regulators do not approve banking privileges for companies and products that undermine safety and soundness, consumer and investor protection, market integrity, financial stability, and oversight. Reducing friction cannot come at the expense of state protections and the ability of states to enforce their laws. Novel companies and products need more supervision and oversight -- not less -- to adequately review risk and protect consumers and the banking system from harm. Regulators must ensure that there are adequate guardrails to protect consumers, investors, and the structural integrity of the financial marketplace before allowing new types of entities to access national banking privileges.
Given the implications of these new charter applications for consumers and the broader economy, we ask that you allow ample opportunity for public comment and hold public hearings before making a decision about whether to approve their entry into the banking system. Further, we strongly urge you to deny bank charters, bank holding company applications, bank mergers and acquisitions, deposit insurance, or other banking privileges for companies that make highcost loans that evade state usury laws or operate with amplified risks to the financial system and endanger consumers.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kwame Raoul, Illinois Attorney General
Kris K. Mayes, Arizona Attorney General
Rob Bonta, California Attorney General
Philip J. Weiser, Colorado Attorney General
William Tong, Connecticut Attorney General
Brian L. Schwalb, District of Columbia Attorney General
Aaron M. Frey, Maine Attorney General
Andrea Joy Campbell, Massachusetts Attorney General
Anne E. Lopez, Hawaii Attorney General
Anthony G. Brown, Maryland Attorney General
Dana Nessel, Michigan Attorney General
Keith Ellison, Minnesota Attorney General
Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General
Jennifer Davenport, New Jersey Attorney General
Raul Torrez, New Mexico Attorney General
Letitia James, New York Attorney General
Dan Rayfield, Oregon Attorney General
Peter Neronha, Rhode Island Attorney General
Charity R. Clark, Vermont Attorney General
Nick Brown, Washington Attorney General
* * *
Original text and footnotes here: https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/News-Room/Current-News/2026.7.15%20letter%20to%20prudential%20regulators%20about%20bank%20charters%20FINAL.pdf?language_id=1
News Release here: https://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/news/story/attorney-general-raoul-calls-on-federal-regulators-to-deny-banking-charters-for-high-risk-or-predatory-financial-technology-companies
Del. A.G. Jennings, Mayor Carney and Chief Campos release Body-Worn Camera Footage
DOVER, Delaware, July 17 -- Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
AG Jennings, Mayor Carney and Chief Campos release body-worn camera footage
We are aware of an issue with the link to Officer 3's body-worn camera footage that redirected viewers to Officer 1's video. The link has been updated. Please contact DOJ.Media@delaware.gov for assistance if the issue persists.
-
The Delaware Department of Justice, the City of Wilmington, and Wilmington Police Department jointly released body-worn camera (BWC) footage related to the June 24,
... Show Full Article
DOVER, Delaware, July 17 -- Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings issued the following news release on July 16, 2026:
* * *
AG Jennings, Mayor Carney and Chief Campos release body-worn camera footage
We are aware of an issue with the link to Officer 3's body-worn camera footage that redirected viewers to Officer 1's video. The link has been updated. Please contact DOJ.Media@delaware.gov for assistance if the issue persists.
-
The Delaware Department of Justice, the City of Wilmington, and Wilmington Police Department jointly released body-worn camera (BWC) footage related to the June 24,2026 officer-involved shooting (OIS) of Kadir Skinner near 24th & Carter Streets in Wilmington. Three officers' BWC videos are being released.
* Officer 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrkSgAurBLM)
* Officer 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxkzPCk35Uo)
* Officer 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpUQDAbCH5k)
The footage begins shortly before each officer arrives at the scene and ends shortly after they return to their vehicles. The faces and names of witnesses and officers have been redacted pursuant to the DOJ's legal and ethical obligations during an active criminal investigation. The footage is otherwise unaltered.
BWCs are worn on officers' torsos, and by design automatically and constantly record video, but not audio, as part of a "buffering" period up to and until the time that the camera is activated. When a BWC is activated, it automatically retains any available footage and begins to record both video and audio from that point forward. As a result BWC video is typically silent when it begins.
The video is being disclosed as a matter of public interest. Although the OIS remains the subject of an ongoing investigation by the Division of Civil Rights & Public Trust (DCRPT), investigators have completed substantial early steps--including but not limited to key witness interviews, community canvasses, and family meetings--that may otherwise have been jeopardized by expedited disclosure. During the active investigation the DOJ cannot characterize the events, people, or objects captured in the video, nor disclose any other evidence. Consistent with DOJ policy, the officers will be identified and all evidence published as part of a fully-detailed public report and legal analysis following the investigation's conclusion.
The DOJ continues to seek supplemental video, which may be submitted to publictrust@delaware.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://news.delaware.gov/2026/07/16/ag-jennings-mayor-carney-and-chief-campos-release-body-worn-camera-footage/
