Bipartisan Antitrust Statutory Reform and the Anticipated Effects on Antitrust Litigation

Featuring:

• E. Stewart Jeffries, Founder & President, Jeffries Strategies LLC
• Mark Meador, Deputy Chief Counsel for Antitrust and Competition Policy, U.S. Senate
• Moderator: Kaitlyn Barry, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division

In an increasingly partisan climate, there has been an unusually bipartisan chorus calling for antitrust reform and action, particular at the state level. The recently passed omnibus spending bill (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023) contained several sections of important antitrust legislation. Most notably, the law includes language guaranteeing state attorneys general venue preference where they litigate antitrust cases.  Spearheaded by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and Representative Ken Buck (R-CO), the State Antitrust Enforcement Venue Act ensures that the states are afforded the same deference as the United States when selecting their venue to enforce the federal antitrust laws and removes the inefficiencies and barriers they previously confronted.  The state attorneys general strongly supported the bill and submitted a letter through the National Association of Attorneys General, signed by 52 state and territory attorneys general. Before the Act was passed, the law permitted the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to consolidate multiple cases that have one or more common questions of law or fact into a single district for litigation, with an exception for cases brought by the federal government.  The Act now extends that exception to antitrust cases brought by state attorneys general, exempting states from having their cases consolidated and transferred over their objections, a significant change.

Please join us for a very special luncheon featuring a distinguished panel of antitrust and litigation experts examining these developments and discussing their probable effects on antitrust litigation.

*******

As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.