I don't meant to conflate corporatists with libertarians - just that they tend to come to the same conclusion on these issues.
And looking at the American political landscape, there are far more dyed-in-the-wool anti-human corporatists holding power then there are libertarians.
I was referring to the alternatives available in the status quo legal system in the US, but I disagree that more powerful regulatory agencies are a complete replacement for class actions, though they are perhaps independently desirable.
> 'Doing nothing' is a false dichotomy unless you subscribe to libertarian/corporatist philosophy. (Which would, if it could, abolish the position of the attorney general.)
No, it wouldn't (at least, most libertarians and even more so pro-corporate types recognize a role for government and a role for AGs within that government, though a narrower role than the status quo for each.) It might eliminate state causes of action on behalf of consumers, but those aren't the whole (or even main) thing that AGs, who are the state or federal government's chief legal counsel and law enforcement officer, do.
(Also, you seem to be missing “corporatist” to mean “pro-corporation minarchist capitalist”; corporatism is a disinct politico-economic philosophy that is about as far from libertarianism/minarchism as possible.)