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.
Statement for the Record on Antitrust, Digital Ad Markets, and the Rule of Law
Today, the Committee for Justice provided a statement for inclusion in the record of the Subcommittee’s September 15th hearing, “Stacking the Tech: Has Google Harmed Competition in Online Advertising?” The letter was submitted by a group of legal experts, economists, and consumer and taxpayer advocates who believe in the importance of promoting competitive markets and defending the rule of law.
FTC v. Qualcomm: The Recent Ruling On Antitrust Adventurism
On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit reversed the Federal Trade Commission's win in the agency's case accusing Qualcomm of violating antitrust law through its licensing practices for standard-essential patents covering cellular technology. Richard Epstein, John Shu, and Ashley Baker discuss this ruling and explore the history, arguments, and implications for the current debate over antitrust enforcement and the competitive process in high-tech markets..
Ashley Baker on What's Next for Big Tech and the Alliance on Antitrust | Consumer Choice Radio
INTERVIEW: Ashley Baker (@andashleysays) – Director of Public Policy, The Committee for Justice
Letter for the Record on Antitrust from Conservative and Free Market Leaders
Using antitrust to achieve policy or political goals would upend more than a century of legal and economic learning and progress. The need to bring coherency to antitrust law through a neutral underlying principle that cannot be weaponized is what led to the adoption of the modern consumer welfare standard. It is broad enough to incorporate a wide variety of evidence and shifting economic circumstances but also clear and objective enough to prevent being subjected to the beliefs of courts and enforcers.
Politico: House Judiciary Hearing, Explained
The Alliance on Antitrust, which “seeks to foster a greater understanding of the issues and arguments at the core of the antitrust debate,” launched Wednesday.
Axios: Conservatives Aim to Cool GOP's Newfound Antitrust Fervor
The Alliance on Antitrust officially launches today, the same day the CEOs of Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook are set to testify in a major antitrust hearing. The new group brings together more than a dozen right-of-center groups and individuals and is spearheaded by the Committee for Justice. The coalition formed in response to calls to weaponize antitrust for broader purposes, Ashley Baker, director of public policy at the Committee for Justice, told Axios.
Conservative Groups Leveraging Big Tech Hearing for Political Change
Several other conservative groups are concerned that the right’s fury at Big Tech was channeled improperly toward support for antitrust enforcement and want to steer it toward different policy goals. More than a dozen conservative groups formed a new “Alliance on Antitrust” to dampen the populist antitrust movement’s momentum. The alliance’s members include the American Legislative Exchange Council, Citizens Against Government Waste, and FreedomWorks among others. “Instead of pursuing a light-touch approach to antitrust enforcement, some policymakers from across the ideological spectrum are increasingly agitating to use antitrust law as a political weapon against perceived foes,” said Pete Sepp, president of the National Taxpayers Union — another alliance member. “The Alliance on Antitrust can play an important role in persuading lawmakers and regulators to avoid pursuits that would harm American economic growth and recovery.” FreedomWorks senior policy analyst Josh Withrow said in a statement that expanding the scope of antitrust enforcement to include conservative grievances of political bias would open “a Pandora’s box that could have dire consequences throughout our economy.”
Antitrust in the Digital Age: Does New Technology Call for New Rules?
America’s technology companies have created huge gains for consumers, developing networks and products that connect the world in ways that were inconceivable just 20 years ago. Yet this progress has not been without its critics. The dominance of large platforms has led to concerns about the harmful effects of lock-in and path dependency, with many arguing the technology sector is unique and requires new approaches to antitrust policy. In particular, it is argued that the consumer welfare standard that guides American antitrust policy is ineffective for regulating Big Tech. Yet with the lack of demonstrable consumer harm, would increased government interventions improve the market?
Antitrust Populism and the Rule of Law
Our panel last month discussed Robert Bork’s consumer welfare standard, which has heavily influenced the evolution of antitrust analysis and enforcement over the past 42 years, and how Bork’s paradigm is under attack. Many defenders of the rule of law are concerned with the populist notion that competition law should be weaponized and used as a tool to address broader socio-economic concerns. Furthermore, adopting populist proposals that seek to rewrite antitrust law would upend more than a century of legal and economic learning and progress. Richard Epstein, Mark Jamison, and Kristian Stout dive deeper into the recent populist antitrust movement and how the failure to distinguish between the proper and improper uses of antitrust laws poses a threat to the rule of law.
A Modern Antitrust Paradox? The Consumer Welfare Standard and Recent Proposals
Robert Bork’s consumer welfare paradigm, which has heavily influenced the evolution of antitrust analysis and enforcement over the past 42 years, is under attack. Critics from both parties assert not only that antitrust has been unable to keep up with developments in the high tech, finance, and communications industries, but also that competition law should be weaponized and used as a tool to address broader concerns such as privacy, inequality, and political viewpoint discrimination. In response, the DOJ and FTC have launched investigations into Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Twitter and Google. Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee has launched its own investigation into these companies and are also reviewing whether changes are necessary to existing antitrust laws. It is critical to understand the arguments at the core of the antitrust debate and what is motivating recent proposals. Will Robert Bork’s “consumer welfare” standard survive?