He’s
Using the Department of Justice to Play Favorites Among Corporations, Too
By Phil Mattera, Dirt
Diggers Digest
Trump’s
effort to influence the outcome of the prosecution of his buddy Roger Stone
represents another threat to the rule of law in the United States.
Yet it is
not just the rule of criminal law that is endangered. The Trump Administration
has also been meddling with civil law, particularly in the area of antitrust.
This
has been going on for a while.
Early in his administration, the Trump Justice Department sought to block AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, mainly, it appears, because the president wanted to get back at Time Warner subsidiary CNN for its negative coverage of him.
Even after a federal court ruled in favor of AT&T and allowed it to close the deal, Justice continued its legal crusade. A year ago, some critics were arguing that Trump’s actions with regard to AT&T amounted to an impeachable offense.
Early in his administration, the Trump Justice Department sought to block AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, mainly, it appears, because the president wanted to get back at Time Warner subsidiary CNN for its negative coverage of him.
Even after a federal court ruled in favor of AT&T and allowed it to close the deal, Justice continued its legal crusade. A year ago, some critics were arguing that Trump’s actions with regard to AT&T amounted to an impeachable offense.
Trump
is trying to use antitrust laws not only to harm his opponents but to reward
his friends.
Last year, the Department of Justice did Trump’s bidding by opening an antitrust investigation of four automakers that had sided with California in a dispute over whether the state could maintain its stricter automobile emissions standards in the face of the administration’s move to ease those standards at the federal level. Recently, Justice quietly dropped the probe after concluding that the companies had violated no laws—something that was clear from the beginning.
As
with criminal cases, Trump is trying to use antitrust laws not only to harm his
opponents but to reward his friends. Exhibit A here is the proposed merger of
T-Mobile and Sprint.
A federal judge has just ruled in favor of the deal, which will greatly reduce competition in a wireless industry that is already highly concentrated. One study found that it would also depress the wages of workers at cellphone retail stores.
A federal judge has just ruled in favor of the deal, which will greatly reduce competition in a wireless industry that is already highly concentrated. One study found that it would also depress the wages of workers at cellphone retail stores.
The
case had been brought by attorneys general in 13 states and the District of
Columbia concerned that the combination had received approval from the Justice
Department and the Federal Communications Commission.
Those
approvals came amid reports over the past year that the merger was being
strongly promoted by the White House. Trump is very chummy with Masayoshi Son,
the chair of Sprint’s Japanese parent SoftBank, who has cultivated close ties
with the president by making lavish promises of new investments in the U.S.
that are unlikely to materialize. SoftBank, in fact, is in bad shape
financially, due to setbacks relating to its stakes in companies such as We
Work and Uber.
Trump’s
Washington Hotel
Meanwhile,
T-Mobile also stoked the administration’s enthusiasm for the merger by spending hundreds of thousands of
dollars at Trump’s D.C. hotel.
When
Trump does not have a personal stake in the matter, he seems willing to large
mergers proceed. He made some noises about the combination of aerospace giants
Raytheon and United Technologies but then dropped the matter. The deal is
expected to close in the next few months.
Friends
and Foes
Other
big combinations have also been succeeding. Last year alone, Bristol-Myers
Squibb acquired Celgene; Occidental Petroleum bought Anadarko; Walt Disney took
over a big chunk of Twenty-First Century Fox; and so on.
What
we are left with are two problems. On the one hand, we have an administration
that is largely willing to let corporate concentration continue unchecked. On
the other hand, we have a president who is willing to selectively intervene in
deals to help friends and harm foes.
Both
practices are exactly the opposite of what is in the public interest. The
antitrust laws should be applied rigorously to control corporate power, and a
president should refrain from meddling in deals, especially when it’s done for
personal political reasons. But that’s not the way it works in Trumpworld.
