At this year’s ABA Antitrust Section Spring Meeting in Washington, D.C., industry professionals gathered to discuss the evolving landscape of antitrust regulation in the U.S. From procedural updates to constitutional questions surrounding agency structure, the event highlighted several key developments worth watching.
New HSR Rules Moving Forward
One of the most significant updates involved the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) filing process. The new HSR filing requirements took effect in February of 2025. Early signs suggest continued support for these new merger review guidelines. The rule passed with a unanimous 5–0 vote, indicating broad bipartisan agreement. FTC Chair Fergusson has publicly affirmed his intent to support and uphold the rule going forward.
Structural Questions Surrounding the FTC
Originally designed as an independent agency, the Federal Trade Commission was established in 1914 with a five-commissioner structure that includes seats for minority-party representation. Recent changes—namely, the dismissal of both minority commissioners—have prompted renewed attention to the FTC’s role and governance.
This development may lead to a reexamination of Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, the 1935 Supreme Court decision that limited the President’s ability to remove FTC commissioners for political reasons. Any changes to this precedent could have broader implications not only for the FTC but also for other administrative agencies and their judicial functions. The discussion also touched on the Unitary Executive Theory, which advocates for a more centralized executive authority over federal agencies.
Growing Role of State Enforcement
With some uncertainty at the federal level, several states are taking a more active role in antitrust oversight. For example, Colorado recently filed its first-ever noncompete civil suit in an effort to block a potential merger. This marks a notable shift, suggesting that states may increasingly lead enforcement efforts, especially in areas where federal priorities are still developing.
The Sherman Antitrust Act: Section 2 Enforcement Trends Continue
Section 2 of the Sherman Act remains a key tool in addressing alleged monopolistic behavior. Several high-profile cases were initiated in recent years against companies like Google, currently in the remedy phase, Meta, Amazon, and Ticketmaster. Early activity suggests continued focus on tech-related enforcement, with both regulatory agencies and courts watching these matters closely.
Looking Ahead
As procedural rules evolve and structural questions unfold, the antitrust landscape in the U.S. remains dynamic. Between increased state-level activity, continued Section 2 enforcement, and discussions about agency governance, legal professionals and corporate stakeholders should stay informed as the environment continues to shift.
