In an article for the New Jersey Law Journal, Christopher T. Zona, a partner in the Litigation Department of Mandelbaum Barrett PC, explores whether the federal government will maintain its recent uptick in antitrust enforcement under President Trump’s second term. Zona examines the implications of recent administrative actions and their potential impact on antitrust regulation.
Antitrust laws are designed to promote fair competition and prevent monopolies or unfair business practices that harm consumers. These laws empower federal agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), to investigate and act against companies engaging in anti-competitive behavior.
A Look at Recent Administrative Actions Across U.S. Presidencies
Antitrust laws promote fair competition and prevent monopolistic practices that could harm consumers and the economy. Federal agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) enforce these regulations, but their approach varies by administration.
Under President Obama, enforcement was steady, with a focus on blocking anti-competitive mergers. President Trump’s first term saw a mix of continuity and change—his DOJ challenged AT&T’s merger with Time Warner and filed a historic monopolization case against Google. President Biden took a more aggressive stance, appointing strong antitrust enforcers and initiating a record 50 antitrust actions in 2022, causing mergers to hit a 10-year low.
Now, in Trump’s second term, his recent dismissal of Democratic FTC commissioners has raised concerns about the agency’s independence. Critics argue this move could weaken enforcement and favor large corporations under scrutiny.
Next Steps: A Shift in Antitrust Priorities?
With Trump’s second term underway, the direction of antitrust enforcement may change. Rather than continuing aggressive action against Big Tech’s business models, the administration could shift its focus toward content moderation and censorship. At the World Economic Forum, Trump referred to the European Union’s regulatory actions against companies like Apple, Google, and Meta as a “form of taxation,” suggesting a potential shift in approach toward these firms.
Meanwhile, some major tech companies have already adjusted their content policies. Meta recently ended its fact-checking initiative, and Mark Zuckerberg has spoken against certain content regulations imposed under the previous administration. Trump and others have previously raised concerns about content moderation practices, which could lead to an increased focus on free speech and online governance rather than competition and market dominance. We may see the first signs of this new regulatory posture in action with Google’s recent all-cash acquisition of Wiz; Google previously attempted the acquisition last year but abandoned the effort due to concerns over regulatory scrutiny. This deal could serve as an early test of how enforcement priorities are shifting.
For businesses, investors, and consumers, this could mean reduced regulatory scrutiny on corporate mergers and acquisitions, while digital content policies may face new attention. As the administration’s strategy develops, companies will need to adapt to evolving enforcement priorities that could impact both competition and online speech in the coming years.
Read the full New Jersey Law Journal article here.
For more information, you can reach Christopher Zona at czona@mblawfirm.com or 212-324-1879.