By Sam Bowman (Truth on the Market)
The goal of US antitrust law is to ensure that competition continues to produce positive results for consumers and the economy in general. We published a letter co-signed by twenty three of the U.S.’s leading economists, legal scholars and practitioners, including one winner of the Nobel Prize in economics (full list of signatories here), to exactly that effect urging the House Judiciary Committee on the State of Antitrust Law to reject calls for radical upheaval of antitrust law that would, among other things, undermine the independence and neutrality of US antitrust law.
A critical part of maintaining independence and neutrality in the administration of antitrust is ensuring that it is insulated from politics. Unfortunately, this view is under attack from all sides. The President sees widespread misconduct among US tech firms that he believes are controlled by the “radical left” and is, apparently, happy to use whatever tools are at hand to chasten them.
Featured News
Aldi Eyed Kroger-Albertsons Stores Before C&S Deal
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Blue Cross Blue Shield Agrees to Pay $2.8 Billion to Settle Antitrust Claims
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Spain’s BBVA Faces Lengthy Antitrust Review in Hostile Sabadell Takeover Bid
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Hermes Faces Renewed Antitrust Claims Over Birkin Bag Sales Practices
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Google to Challenge Antitrust Ruling; CEO Sundar Pichai Signals Prolonged Legal Battle
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh