Some conservatives: move antitrust solely to DOJ or end FTC independence
Chapter records the view that antitrust enforcement should sit solely in DOJ because FTC commissioners are not removable at will, and that Humphrey’s Executor-style independence may be revisited—while also arguing conservatives should not unilaterally disarm the administrative state.
Mandate
Mandate Ch. 30 (FTC) — Should the FTC Enforce Antitrust—or Even Continue to Exist?: some conservatives think antitrust enforcement should be invested solely in DOJ; FTC commissioners are not removable at will, which many believe violates Article II Vesting Clause; conservatives have long believed in ending law enforcement activities of independent agencies or ending their independent status; Humphrey’s Executor seems ripe for revisiting; others argue conservatives cannot unilaterally disarm and must use administrative power until the administrative state is curtailed.
Undo plan
1) Keep dual FTC–DOJ antitrust enforcement with clearance MOUs unless Congress consolidates.
2) If independence is altered, replace with for-cause protections and bipartisan commission structure—not pure presidential weaponization.
3) Oppose abolishing FTC consumer-protection functions without FTC Act successor home.
4) Litigate removal power cleanly rather than informal defiance of Humphrey’s Executor.
5) Verify: statutory structure; DOJ–FTC clearance disputes.