When the 120th Congress convenes in January 2027, Big Business could find itself in the crosshairs. Second only to administration officials, the Trump family itself and political operatives, corporate America may sit near the top of Democrats' ambitious oversight agenda. Signs point to an exceptionally tough two years for business leaders, whom many on the left believe cowered under pressure from the president. And the implications for corporate America are consequential. Companies that cultivated cozy White House relationships, financed presidential initiatives, secured lucrative government contracts, or benefited from lax enforcement could soon find themselves in the hot seat during contentious congressional hearings.

Perhaps the sharpest questions will concern not what companies did, but why. Were public commitments quietly traded for access? Did boardrooms trade principle for profit? What did executives know, and when? CEOs who think scrutiny will stop at political donors and Silicon Valley are missing a bigger picture. Banking, insurance, media, health care, transportation, energy, manufacturing and international trade are all fair targets for congressional investigations.

As Dems seek to punish billionaires and high-profile business leaders for what they consider political profiteering, no industry should feel immune from the pent-up scorn of a party that has been shut out of power. Nor should executives mistake divided government for congressional impotence. A Democratic House cannot enact its entire legislative agenda without the Senate and president, but it can demand documents, summon witnesses and conduct investigations within its jurisdiction.

Subpoenas, document demands and other investigative tools can be just as troublesome — if not more — as adverse legislation or regulation. While legislation may die at the doorstep of the White House, an investigation can live on for months, sometimes years.

Should Democrats also capture the Senate, the stakes rise. Committees in both chambers could investigate the same company from different angles, while also advancing legislation on antitrust, finance, data privacy, labor and trade. Dual Democratic control would mean an aggressive and ambitious legislative agenda designed to make up for lost ground. Imagine a CEO, under oath, being asked to justify an internal email about a government contract, a merger review or a private conversation with a high-ranking administration official.

Edited for maximum media effect, broadcast on a 24-hour loop and presented as breaking news, this scenario portends a company’s biggest nightmare. The media’s appetite for political drama, real or manufactured, is bottomless, and a CEO twisting in the wind makes for great ratings. K Street lawyers, lobbyists and consultants already see the commercial possibilities. For them, a congressional reckoning is a growth market: subpoena responses, document reviews, mock hearings, witness prep, negotiations with committee staff, crisis communications and the follow-on litigation that oversight tends to spawn.

Their corporate clients, meanwhile, should prepare for a modern-day inquisition into their business practices and priorities over the last two years — and be prepared to pay handsomely for it. Hearings, however, are only the beginning. Public spectacle has other, equally damaging, consequences in the market. Congressional scrutiny can rattle investors, embolden activists, invite shareholder lawsuits, stimulate state enforcement and provoke consumer backlash, even when accusations prove unfounded.

The direct hit on stock prices, the market and corporate reputation is registered in real time, and could takes months to recover. America’s banks should know. Debanking, consumer fees, credit availability, digital assets and their relationships with federal regulators already present thorny problems for them.

Democrats could spotlight lending fairness, account closures, executive pay and alleged preferential treatment from Washington. Insurance companies are no less vulnerable. Rising premiums, disputed claims, coverage limitations, underwriting practices and executive compensation practically write their own hearing agendas. Not to be overlooked, media and entertainment industries could face similar examination. Broadcast ownership, mega mergers, advertising practices, carriage disputes, streaming services and a deferential relationship with the administration and the Federal Communications Commission invite scrutiny.

So do questions surrounding media censorship, the First Amendment and restrictions on press access to government. But Big Tech may be the most conspicuous target. Executives who embraced the administration’s policies lock, stock and barrel may be asked about government contracts, regulatory favors, political contributions, and their influence over federal policy. Legitimate questions about privacy, competition, consumer protection and artificial intelligence deserve legitimate answers from Big Tech leaders.

And then there are data centers. Few issues have brought together such unlikely allies as the enormous AI facilities throughout the country. They have promised jobs and investment while prompting concerns about electricity rates, water use, land, tax incentives and community economic development. While both Democratic and Republican members have sought restrictions, moratoria and outright bans on new development, for congressional Democrats, data centers may be the low-hanging fruit they need to connect even more intimately with political independents.

Beyond the data center debate lie even larger questions about the integrity of America’s electric grid, personal privacy, job displacement, and global competition with China. Other industries should be on alert. Transportation, energy, trade, and health care are also fair game for Democratic review.

Airlines may face renewed questions about safety and service. Retailers could be pressed about tariffs, overseas sourcing and supply chains. Energy, oil and gas industries stand to answer questions on permits, pricing, the environment and profits. And the health care industry faces perennial questions about rising costs and shrinking coverage. Corporate America should expect more than a change in committee leadership — it should expect a change in perspective. Issues involving Big Business, Big Tech and Big Banks are too consequential to the economy, too visible to the public and too rich in political opportunity to be left alone.

But there is a cautionary tale for Democrats as well. Whether they control one house of Congress or two, Democrats must remember that punishing business is not the same as protecting the public. They can demand corporate accountability without declaring war on business. American companies employ millions of people, invest billions of dollars and compete in a global economy against foreign rivals determined to capture and control our markets. Congress should be mindful that political spectacle carries an economic price, and that price is rarely paid by CEOs alone.

It falls on employees, shareholders, consumers and communities. China, Russia and foreign competitors will not suspend their efforts and ambitions while Washington settles political scores. They will exploit every distraction, every delayed investment and every self-inflicted wound. Democrats should understand that Congress needs vigilance, not vengeance. American voters want accountability, not animosity, from its leaders. Anything else is a dereliction of their duty to American citizens and the United States Constitution.

Adonis Hoffman writes on business, law and policy. He served in senior legal roles in the U.S. House of Representatives and at the Federal Communications Commission.