Urging a “No” on H.R. 3843, the "Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act"
The following memo was sent to members of the U.S. House of Representatives and their staff, opposing H.R. 3843, the "Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act."
The Conservative Case Against Weaponizing Antitrust Law
Today, the consumer welfare standard remains one of the greatest success stories of the conservative legal movement. However, recent sentiments within both parties have attracted proposals that would mark a return to highly-interventionist, pre-1970s jurisprudence in which the “sole consistency,” as Justice Potter Stewart famously said, “is that the government always wins.” Our panel of experts discuss these proposals, their implications, and the best path forward for conservatives.
Event Video: The Antitrust Cases Against Facebook: Examining the Lawsuits and Implications
Our panel of experts discuss the antitrust lawsuits against Facebook, the merger review process and FTC enforcement, and assess the implications for consumers, companies, and the law.
Virtual Panel Discussion: New Technologies, Same Principles: The Conservative Case Against Weaponizing Antitrust Law
During the 1986 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for then-Judge Antonin Scalia, he was asked about his views on antitrust. “In law school, I never understood [antitrust law],” Scalia explained, “I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do understand it, that I should not have understood it because it did not make any sense then.” This much-needed coherency in antitrust law was brought about by the adoption of the consumer welfare standard. The intersection of economic analysis and the law provided a neutral underlying principle that allowed conservatives to reign in a broad, unprincipled area of the law that was once used as a political and socioeconomic tool.
Today, this remains one of the greatest success stories of the conservative legal movement. However, recent sentiments within both parties have attracted proposals that would mark a return to highly-interventionist, pre-1970s jurisprudence in which the “sole consistency,” as Justice Potter Stewart famously said, “is that the government always wins.” Our panel of experts will discuss these proposals, their implications, and the best path forward for conservatives.
Virtual Panel Discussion: The Antitrust Cases Against Facebook: Examining the Lawsuits and Implications
Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and a coalition of 48 state attorneys general filed two separate lawsuits against Facebook. The complaints argued that the company maintained a monopoly position in the “personal social media networking” market through a series of acquisitions over the past decade intended to buy up potential rivals and by imposing restrictive policies to hinder companies that present competitive threats. Both suits call for the divestiture of Instagram and WhatsApp, along with other proposed remedies. Our panel of experts will discuss the lawsuits, the merger review process and FTC enforcement, and assess the implications for consumers, companies, and the law.
Shifting the Burden of Proof in Competition Law
The House Committee on the Judiciary recently released a report on the state of competition in the digital marketplace that was the result of a 16 month long investigation. The report describes itself as being “an attack on how America has approached antitrust for the past 40 years.” One of the recommendations in the report inverting the evidentiary burden of proof and shifting it away from the plaintiff to the defendant, particularly in civil mergers challenges.
This episode lays out the current framework used in U.S. courts for meeting the burden of proof in competition law cases, the role of presumptions in antitrust litigation, and the implications of shifting the burden to the defendant.
Event Video: State Antitrust Laws and Enforcement by Attorneys General
On Friday, November 20, pur panel of experts will discuss antitrust federalism, the complexities of state enforcement actions, and how state antitrust law can differ from federal law (and why that’s potentially a problem). We will also delve into the current investigations as well as one of the last major multi-state antitrust actions, Ohio v. American Express. Register to Attend
Virtual Panel Discussion: State Antitrust Laws and Enforcement by Attorneys General
On Friday, November 20, pur panel of experts will discuss antitrust federalism, the complexities of state enforcement actions, and how state antitrust law can differ from federal law (and why that’s potentially a problem). We will also delve into the current investigations as well as one of the last major multi-state antitrust actions, Ohio v. American Express. Register to Attend
Alliance on Antitrust November Update
The last few weeks have been eventful for the Alliance on Antitrust and our allies. From the release of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law’s report, to our statement in response, we have been busy making the case for the consumer welfare standard and for why antitrust law should not be politicized. Alliance members and friends have been highly engaged in the fight. And our coalition is expanding. Three groups recently joined the Alliance on Antitrust. We are thrilled to welcome the Independence Institute, Mountain States Legal Foundation and the Market Institute.
Coalition Update: New Members and Recent Content
We would like to announce the addition of our three newest members: The American Conservative Union, Goldwater Institute, and Consumer Choice Center. Each of these members issued a brief statement.