Some antitrust lawyers often say the federal government’s decisions about which mergers to challenge, which monopolists to rein in, and which price-fixers to send to jail are relatively consistent regardless of who occupies the White House. But has federal antitrust enforcement really been entirely apolitical, based on economics, and divorced from other issues such as trade, job creation, and national security? Should it be? A panel of distinguished practitioners and former top government officials from both parties discussed these issues in our Teleforum, which was especially timely given calls by Senate Democrats for increased antitrust enforcement as part of “A Better Deal” and the increasing use of competition law by foreign governments against U.S. companies.
- Jon Leibowitz, Partner, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, and Former Chair, Federal Trade Commission
- William E. Kovacic, Global Competition Professor of Law and Policy & Director, Competition Law Center, The George Washington University Law School, and Former Chair, Federal Trade Commission
- Seth Bloom, President & Founder, Bloom Strategic Counsel PLLC, and Former General Counsel, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Antitrust Subcommittee
- Tad Lipsky, Former Senior Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Justice Department Antitrust Division Official, and Retired Partner, Latham & Watkins
- Moderator: Richard M. Steuer, Senior Counsel, Mayer Brown LLP, and Former Chair, American Bar Association Antitrust Section