antitrust and competition

Advertiser boycotts, content moderation coalitions, and other forms of coordinated conduct increasingly pursue both commercial and social objectives, blurring the line between protected expression and unlawful collusion. In a new paper Madhavi Singh argues that extending First Amendment immunity to these “prosocial cartels” would undermine antitrust law and that they should instead be evaluated under the rule of reason.

Colombia is one of 52 countries that have enshrined competition protections in their constitution. The Constitutional Court’s 2026 ruling in Superintendence of Industry and Commerce v. National Civil Registry explored how countries may resolve clashing constitutional principles, in this case the state’s protection of competition and the separation of powers, write Maciej Bernatt, Angel Madiedo, Hannya Ramírez Madrid.

In new research, Patrice Bougette, Frédéric Marty, and Simone Vannuccini propose that competition authorities add a conditional fine to antitrust cases that is activated when behavioral remedies are no longer effective.

For decades antitrust agencies, courts, and scholars have debated whether Section 7 of the Clayton Act permits an efficiency defense, in which merging firms can argue that enhanced efficiencies from the merger show that it does not reduce competition. However, the Supreme Court’s recent establishment of the “major questions doctrine,” which enforces or re-enforces a textualist reading of regulatory statues, undermines proponents of the efficiency defense, because the Clayton Act does not clearly and explicitly contain an efficiency defense. The “major questions doctrine” essentially acts as textualism on steroids,” writes Robert H. Lande.

Firms can now charge each shopper a different price, and regulators worry that the gains will flow from consumers to companies. But personalized pricing has two built-in limits: shoppers learn to hide how much they want things, and cheap purchases can be resold, writes Nursultan Mukhtaruly.

The Digital Markets Act establishes central rules and enforcement for digital platforms across the European Union, but allows decentralized private enforcement on the national level. In new research, Lena Hornkohl and Barbara Justen reflect on how two recent German court cases show how national litigation can make the DMA more effective, but also highlight the need for mechanisms that aid in consistent interpretation.

Consumers are anxious about the economy, and it’s due not only to inflation but to market power that raises prices and reduces quality, variety, and innovation. Policymakers’ prescriptions for resolving the cost-of-living crisis have mostly ignored the role of antitrust policy, but waning competition is at the heart of these problems, writes Diana L. Moss.

In new research, Elettra Bietti compares the efficacy of the two legal avenues that have arisen to restrain social media’s ability to monopolize people’s time and attention: antitrust policy and product liability for consumer harm. Looking at the results of two recent Meta cases, she finds that product liability has proven the most capable in introducing the frictions needed to reduce social media’s addictive design.

The Chicago School believed that markets operate best when they are left to organize themselves, and that state regulation only disrupts this process to...

The United States government launched the American AI Exports Program to help American firms win contracts from international customers. In a bid to enhance international competitiveness, the program risks stifling domestic competition, writes Javaid Sofi.