I truly don’t understand the New Right’s theory of state power. Classical liberals recognize that the state has a unique and awesome authority—the right to use physical coercion to attain its objectives—and that there should thus be some principled limits on that authority. 🧵 State power can legitimately protect individuals’ rights to person and property and can force welfare-enhancing outcomes when there’s some systematic defect in private ordering that prevents those outcomes from occurring (e.g., a market failure). 2/

Lots of folks are asking why conservatives don't embrace FTC Chair Lina Khan, who is using her position to constrain progressive Big Tech and the giant corporations that often seem hostile to the right. Perhaps it's b/c Khan's agenda conflicts w/ three pillars of conservatism. 🧵

https://twitter.com/JonSchweppe/status/1714700438669283677

Before I explain, let me say that I have no antipathy toward Chair Khan. She seems like a nice person who is pursuing ends she believes are good. She's also accomplished a ton in her short career, and I respect that. Her agenda, though, is far out of step with conservatism. 2/

DOJ has filed a bonkers motion in limine in the Google search case. The motion asks the court to bar Google from offering evidence that the conduct the govt has challenged improves Google’s products and is therefore not anticompetitive.🧵 1/14 law360.com/articles/17066… DOJ’s lawsuit challenges Google’s efforts to ensure that Google Search is the default search engine on mobile devices, web browsers, and search-enabled products like wearables. The primary complaint is that Google pays for default status. 2/14 justice.gov/d9/press-relea…

This is unbelievable. @FTC staffers are opposing a request by a group of professors (including me) to file an amicus brief in its administrative challenge to the Illumina/Grail merger.🧵 ftc.gov/system/files/d… The staffers insinuate that we amici have been bought off by the merging parties and that our views should therefore be ignored. As an initial matter, it’s awfully rich for FTC to cry bias in an administrative proceeding in which it acts as both prosecutor and judge. Moreover,

My former colleague @HawleyMO, whom I recruited to Mizzou Law and consider a friend, penned this @firstthingsmag piece. He argues that Robinhood’s restriction on GameStop trading was a Big Tech conspiracy to hold down the little guy. A few thoughts. 1/x firstthings.com/web-exclusives… @HawleyMO is lying. I hate to say that of a friend, but it’s true. He’s saying things he knows are false. As many have explained, Robinhood halted certain trading to deal with a liquidity crisis. He knows there was no conspiracy to protect hedge funds. 2/x google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.…

1/6 - So many bad ideas in @ewarren’s antitrust proposal. Most of the chatter so far has been on the merger prohibitions, but as this article shows, there’s much more. Some thoughts on a couple of provisions: google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc… 2/6 - According to the article, the bill reverses Trinko and saddles dominant firms with a duty to share essential facilities (incl data?) with their rivals. This would impair dynamic efficiency by reducing the incentive to create valuable amenities in the first place.

What do @HalSinger, @geoffmanne, @RichardAEpstein, Keith Hylton, and yours truly have in common? We all believe @FTC blew it in its 1-800 Contacts decision. We joined @WLF to ask the 2nd Cir to vacate FTC’s order. truthonthemarket.com/2019/06/18/the… In settling trademark disputes, 1-800 and some rivals agreed not to bid on search ads keyed to each other’s trademarks. FTC said this was “inherently suspect” and condemned it under the “quick look” approach. Two problems with that: