Recalibrate antitrust beyond pure price-Bork model given speech and democracy risks
Mandate’s conclusion says many conservatives believe developments—government–private collusion, threats to free speech, and harms to children’s well-being—may warrant careful recalibration of antitrust and consumer-protection enforcement.
Mandate
Mandate Ch. 30 (FTC) — Conclusion: many, but not all, conservatives believe developments that make government–private sector collusion more likely, threaten democratic institutions such as free speech, and threaten happiness/mental well-being of Americans (particularly children) may warrant the FTC’s making a careful recalibration of certain aspects of antitrust and consumer protection law and enforcement.
Undo plan
1) Codify that speech/democracy concerns do not replace antitrust injury elements in court.
2) Channel censorship collusion claims to constitutional litigation and Section 5 only where commercial unfairness is proven.
3) Maintain consumer-welfare core while allowing quality/innovation harms with evidence.
4) Separate child-protection consumer cases from monopolization theory.
5) Verify: enforcement manual language; case theory audits.