Trump Expected to Shift Course on Antitrust, Stop Google Breakup

The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

Trump Expected to Shift Course on Antitrust, Stop Google Breakup

The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)

Donald Trump will likely dial back some of the antitrust policies pursued under the administration of President Joe Biden, potentially including a bid to break up Alphabet's Google over its dominance in online search, experts said.

Trump is expected to continue cases against Big Tech, several of which began in his first term, but his recent skepticism about a potential Google breakup highlights the power he will hold over how those cases are run.

"If you do that, are you going to destroy the company? What you can do without breaking it up is make sure it's more fair," he said at an event in Chicago in October, Reuters reported.

The US Department of Justice is currently pursuing two antimonopoly cases against Google - one over search and another over advertising technology, as well as a case against Apple . The US Federal Trade Commission is suing Meta Platforms and Amazon.com.

The DOJ has laid out a range of potential remedies in the search case, including making Google divest parts of its business such as the Chrome Web browser and ending agreements that make it the default search engine on devices like Apple's iPhone.

But the trial over those fixes will not happen until April 2025, with a final ruling likely in August. That gives Trump and the DOJ time to change course if they choose, said William Kovacic, a law professor at George Washington University.

"He is certainly in the position to control the DOJ's disposition of the remedies phase," said Kovacic, who chaired the Federal Trade Commission under then-president George W. Bush.

Trump is also likely to pull back on some policies that have irritated dealmakers under the Biden administration, attorneys said. One is a reluctance to settle with merging companies, which was previously common and let companies address competition problems that agencies raised about deals by taking actions like selling part of the business.

The FTC and DOJ would likely scrap merger review guidelines crafted under Biden, said Jon Dubrow, a partner at law firm McDermott Will & Emery.

"The 2023 merger guidelines were very hostile to mergers and acquisitions," he said, echoing a view widely held on Wall Street.

The FTC's ban on most noncompete clauses in employer-employee contracts could be more vulnerable to a lawsuit brought by the US Chamber of Commerce, if the FTC votes not to defend it.

About 30 million people, or 20% of US workers, have signed noncompetes, according to the FTC. The agency is currently appealing a court ruling that blocked the rule.

But such actions to dismantle the work of FTC Chair Lina Khan will depend on a Trump-appointed replacement being confirmed to give the bipartisan five-member commission a Republican majority.

Khan's initiatives focused on what she saw as societal harms caused by unchecked corporate consolidation, drawing praise from both Democrats and some Republicans, including Vice President-elect JD Vance. But some in the business and legal communities have criticized her approach as too aggressive.

Trump is not expected to drastically curtail antitrust enforcement, however. A similar number of merger cases was brought under his first term as during the first two years of the Biden administration, according to an analysis by the Sheppard Mullin law firm.



US Supreme Court Tosses Case Involving Securities Fraud Suit against Facebook

A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
TT

US Supreme Court Tosses Case Involving Securities Fraud Suit against Facebook

A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)

The US Supreme Court sidestepped on Friday a decision on whether to allow shareholders to proceed with a securities fraud lawsuit accusing Meta's Facebook of misleading investors about the misuse of the social media platform's user data.
The justices, who heard arguments in the case on Nov. 6, dismissed Facebook's appeal of a lower court's ruling that had allowed a 2018 class action led by Amalgamated Bank to proceed. The Supreme Court opted not resolve the underlying legal dispute, determining that the case should not have been taken up. Its action leaves the lower court's decision in place, Reuters reported. 
The court's dismissal came in a one-line order that provided no explanation. The Facebook dispute was one of two cases to come before the Supreme Court this month involving the right of private litigants to hold companies to account for alleged securities fraud. The other one, involving the artificial intelligence chipmaker Nvidia, was argued on Nov. 13. The Supreme Court has not ruled yet in the Nvidia case.
The plaintiffs in the Facebook case claimed the company unlawfully withheld information from investors about a 2015 data breach involving British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica that affected more than 30 million Facebook users. They accused Facebook of misleading investors in violation of the Securities Exchange Act, a 1934 federal law that requires publicly traded companies to disclose their business risks. Facebook's stock fell following 2018 media reports that Cambridge Analytica had used improperly harvested Facebook user data in connection with Donald Trump's successful US presidential campaign in 2016. The investors have sought unspecified monetary damages in part to recoup the lost value of the Facebook stock they held.
At issue was whether Facebook broke the law when it failed to detail the prior data breach in subsequent business-risk disclosures, and instead portrayed the risk of such incidents as purely hypothetical.
Facebook argued that it was not required to reveal that its warned-of risk had already materialized because "a reasonable investor" would understand risk disclosures to be forward-looking statements. President Joe Biden's administration supported the shareholders in the case.
US District Judge Edward Davila dismissed the lawsuit but the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals revived it.
The Cambridge Analytica data breach prompted US government investigations into Facebook's privacy practices, various lawsuits and a US congressional hearing. The US Securities and Exchange Commission in 2019 brought an enforcement action against Facebook over the matter, which the company settled for $100 million. Facebook paid a separate $5 billion penalty to the US Federal Trade Commission over the issue.
The Supreme Court in prior rulings has limited the authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the federal agency that polices securities fraud.