President Joe Biden plans to nominate Lina Khan, a Columbia law professor and progressive champion of the antitrust movement, to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Politico reports. Progressives against big tech and for anti-monopolism praised this decision on Tuesday.
Khan is a “progressive superstar,” ProPublica senior reporter and editor Jesse Eisinger wrote. She first became well known in the law and big tech spheres for her 2017 article published in The Yale Law Journal, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox,” which challenged American antitrust law and its ability to handle companies like Amazon.
In the article, Khan argued that American antitrust laws are not equipped to handle a company like Amazon, which has monopoly-like power despite not looking like a traditional monopoly.
“In her telling, monopolies don’t just exploit consumers and workers in their part of the economy. Even when they offer low prices to consumers, their influence propagates through the entire system,” wrote The Atlantic’s Robinson Meyer in 2018.
Khan’s Yale Law Journal article was praised by experts in business and law as “remarkable,” wrote one Washington Post journalist. A New York Times profile stated that Khan’s article “reframed decades of monopoly law.” When the article was published, Khan was only in her third year of law school.
Since then, Khan has emerged as a leading figure in the antitrust movement. Sarah Miller, director of the American Economic Liberties Project, called her the “intellectual architect of the bipartisan suits against Facebook and Google” in a statement on Tuesday.
Last year, the FTC and Justice Department filed antitrust suits against Google and Facebook, and big tech CEOs were grilled by Congress over their company’s wide-reaching effects on the market. When the House Judiciary Committee put forth recommendations for legislation and reforms to encourage competition, Khan helped to craft that report.
Her appointment, in combination with Biden’s pick of another outspoken antitrust lawyer, Tim Wu, as a White House economic adviser, could signal that Biden is planning to take a more aggressive stance toward big tech than his predecessors. The picks represent, as Politico wrote, “a massive shift in philosophy away from the era of Barack Obama, who proudly forged an alliance between the Democratic Party and Big Tech.”
Biden’s plans to pick Khan for one of the five FTC spots is “the biggest news in antitrust in a year already filled with antitrust news,” wrote Brian Fung, a CNN tech reporter.
Anti-monopolist Fordham law professor Zephyr Teachout wrote that Khan and Wu are “extraordinary, powerful choices by Biden. It gives hope that the last 40 years of consumer welfarism in antitrust could be on its last legs, and that we can start enforcing existing laws with vigor.” Short-term market decisions underscore current antitrust laws, due to a Ronald Reagan-era change that paved the way for thousands of mergers in the ensuing decades.
Khan, along with Wu and Vanita Gupta, a Biden pick for the Justice Department who’s also been critical of big tech, could help to usher in a new era for regulation of monopolies, progressives hope. As the Justice Democrats wrote, “This is a major progressive pick by the Biden administration to check the concentration of corporate power and uplift working families.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.