The Dispute Index

William Tong

Portrait of William Tong
Photo by Wikimedia Commons user Chippewan

Connecticut attorney general

What DI has documented

DI has documented statements by William Tong on Consumer Protection, Energy Policy, and Government Spending, among other topics. Read the quotations, original sources and related cases below.

Topics in this coverage

Show all 11 topics

Statements by William Tong

Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Connecticut Attorney General

Condemned

Response to this claim

ICE's actions at the Meriden courthouse were a deliberate provocation that caused serious injury and needless chaos for the state's court system, and the state will use its authority to enforce the TRUST Act against federal challenges.

“ICE’s deliberate provocation at the courthouse in Meriden resulted in serious injury and caused needless chaos for our court system. ... No one is above the law, including federal immigration officials. We are using every ounce of our authority to protect the people of Connecticut, including vigorously defending the state’s lawful and necessary measures to protect public safety against federal challenges.”
Open source (opens in a new tab)CT law limits federal ICE agents. Debate is over whether it can it be enforced or needs to changeQuotes from Ritter, Tong, Vaulman (for Governor Lamont), the Hands Off Connecticut coalition, Looney and the Judicial Branch spokeswoman
Why we used this label

Tong directly denounces ICE's conduct as a provocation that caused injury and chaos, an express criticism of that conduct.

Read statementDid ICE's conduct at the Meriden, Connecticut, courthouse violate the state's TRUST Act?
Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Connecticut attorney general

Condemned

Statement summary

Tong accused the administration of using taxpayer money to pay companies to abandon offshore wind. His office said the deals lacked actual or imminent litigation to justify Judgment Fund payments.

“He is taking our tax dollars for business bribes to block offshore wind”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Tong's announcement of offshore-wind buyout lawsuitsAttributed Tong statement and paragraphs on Judgment Fund authority
Why we used this label

He rejects the payments as an abuse of taxpayer money.

Read statementDid the Interior Department's offshore wind lease-cancellation payments comply with the Judgment Fund Act?
Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Attorney General of Connecticut, in a statement to SBC Americas

Defended or excused

Statement summary

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong dismissed Underdog’s federal lawsuit as a reuse of arguments other prediction markets have already lost, and said courts have repeatedly held that sports event contracts are sports betting and are not protected from state law by federal regulation.

“This is nothing more than the recycling of failed arguments from other prediction markets. Multiple courts have affirmed that sports event contracts are no different than sports betting and are not magically shielded by federal law.”
Open source (opens in a new tab)SBC Americas: Connecticut Attorney General William Tong on the Underdog suitStatement provided to SBC Americas, mid-article.
Why we used this label

On whether Connecticut may regulate sports prediction markets as gambling, Tong defends the state’s authority to do so, which is the conduct under scrutiny here. He asserts both that the contracts are indistinguishable from sports betting and that federal commodities regulation does not displace state law, the two propositions the preemption argument turns on. He is the first Connecticut law-enforcement principal recorded in this case, alongside the consumer-protection commissioner.

Read statementCan Connecticut regulate sports prediction markets as gambling?
Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Attorney General of Connecticut

Defended or excused

Statement summary

Tong alleges that Kalshi lacks safeguards Connecticut requires and rejects its argument that federal law shields its sports contracts from state regulation.

“None of that is happening now on Kalshi, and we’re suing to put a stop to it”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)William Tong criticizes Kalshi's consumer safeguards · Office of the Connecticut Attorney GeneralAttorney General Tong's quotation; final sentence after the list of consumer protections
Why we used this label

The case asks whether Connecticut can regulate sports prediction markets as gambling, and the conduct under scrutiny is the state's enforcement. Tong says Kalshi lacks the safeguards Connecticut requires and that the state is suing to stop it, which supports the enforcement, so we labeled it Defended or excused. The closest competing label is Condemned, which here would mean opposing state regulation of the markets; his criticism is aimed at Kalshi, not at the state's action. Evidence: the attorney general's announcement.

Read statementCan Connecticut regulate sports prediction markets as gambling?
Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Connecticut attorney general

Condemned

Statement summary

Tong accuses major egg producers of rigging prices and says the settlement will return money and eggs to communities.

“These massive egg producers rigged the system to jack up profits, and all of us paid for it.”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Tong criticizes alleged egg-price manipulationStatement attributed to Tong, beginning "These massive egg producers"
Why we used this label

The reference point is the alleged agreement to manipulate egg prices. Tong directly criticizes that agreement as a system rigged for profit. His support for enforcement is a response to the alleged conduct.

Read statementDid Cal-Maine and other egg producers manipulate egg-price benchmarks?
Portrait of William Tong

William Tong

Role at the time: Connecticut Attorney General, in a press release announcing a lawsuit with Rhode Island

Condemned

Statement summary

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said the federal government had given no justification for halting the nearly complete project, called the order illegal, and announced that Connecticut and Rhode Island were suing to overturn it.

“Revolution Wind is fully permitted, nearly complete and months from providing enough American-made, clean, affordable energy to power 350,000 homes. Now, with zero justification, Trump wants to mothball the project, send workers home, and saddle Connecticut families with millions of dollars in higher energy costs. This kind of erratic and reckless governing is blatantly illegal, and we’re suing to stop it”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Connecticut and Rhode Island to Sue to Overturn Baseless Revolution Wind Stop Work Order · Office of the Connecticut Attorney GeneralConnecticut Attorney General press release dated September 4, 2025
Why we used this label

The case asks whether the federal government was justified in halting Revolution Wind construction, so the reference point is the federal halt orders. Tong says the August 22 order came with no justification, calls it illegal, and announces a lawsuit to stop it. That rejects the halt itself, so we used the Condemned label.

Read statementWas the federal government justified in halting Revolution Wind construction?

A participant is a subject of the case. A speaker has a statement documented in it. A commentator has an opinion or editorial documented in it.