Executive Summary
- What’s new: Oversight of antitrust enforcement, through hearings and legislative proposals, will be a major topic in the 120th Congress once Democrats take control of both the House and the Senate.
- Why it matters: Democratic oversight could temper the willingness of regulators to pursue nonconventional remedies and enforcement practices, potentially leading to an uptick in antitrust enforcement compared to the last two years.
- What to do next: Hearings on and investigations of high-profile prospective transactions can be expected. And an effort is underway to review certain mergers and past settlements approved under the Trump administration.
__________
With Democrats winning control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, oversight of antitrust enforcement will be a major topic in the 120th Congress.
Democratic members of Congress who are poised for leadership positions on the judiciary committees and antitrust subcommittees have made clear that they will conduct oversight of past settlements by antitrust enforcers in the Trump administration, and they are likely to hold hearings on other aspects of federal antitrust enforcement, including high-profile mergers.
Additionally, while the immediate trajectories of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division may not be significantly altered by the change in congressional control, Democratic investigations into prior enforcement activity may temper regulator willingness to pursue unconventional enforcement practices, leading to changes in enforcement priorities.
Leadership Changes
A Democratic Congress will mean a change in control of, and new leadership for, the committees tasked with overseeing antitrust enforcement. The leading Democratic candidates for those leadership positions have made clear that they intend to conduct oversight of the Trump administration’s antitrust enforcement efforts.
House of Representatives
- Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the current ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, is poised to become its next chair and has laid out an aggressive agenda that includes oversight of the DOJ and FTC. Rep. Raskin has been a major critic of antitrust enforcement under the current administration, saying, “The DOJ’s antitrust division is supposed to be there to enforce our competition laws without fear or favor. … Instead DOJ is focused on facilitating pay-to-play political and financial corruption.” He has called for “serious and aggressive oversight of the putative antitrust enforcers.”
- Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., has emerged as a leading contender to chair the House Antitrust Subcommittee, following the retirement of current ranking member Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y. Rep. Balint currently serves as vice ranking member and has called for increased antitrust enforcement, saying that Congress “should be doing all we can to address the real and present dangers that monopolies, especially media and tech monopolies, pose to our markets, our wallets, to consumers, to competitors, and to our democracy.”
- Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the presumptive chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has outlined priorities for the committee, which include investigations into the use of “surveillance” pricing by companies. Rep. Garcia had previously expressed concern about the use of algorithmic and surveillance pricing.
Senate
- Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., the current ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, is positioned to become the subcommittee’s next chair. Sen. Booker has been a vocal critic of the administration’s approach to antitrust enforcement, calling for an effort to “reduce consolidation and increase competition in our markets to lower prices for everyday Americans.” He has also criticized allegedly politicized merger reviews, stating that “antitrust enforcement is supposed to be grounded in expertise and independence, not backroom deals or special treatment for the well-connected.” Sen. Booker, joined by several other senators, has also introduced the CLEAN Mergers Act, which would require the unwinding of certain large mergers absent proof that they did not harm competition.
- Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., has emerged as the leading candidate to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee following the retirement of current ranking member Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. Sen. Whitehouse has also co-sponsored a bill to amend the Tunney Act.
- Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is also expected to be a member of Democratic Senate leadership and has been vocal regarding the need for more stringent antitrust enforcement, stating her belief that “the Trump Administration routinely rubber-stamps harmful corporate mergers that pose competition risks.” In October, she released a report arguing that the Trump administration’s “failure to enforce antitrust laws raises consumers’ costs and limits choice.”
Hearings
In a divided government, the primary tool for a Democratic-controlled Congress to influence antitrust enforcement policy will be public hearings. Sen. Booker has indicated that a Democratic-controlled Senate will use its oversight authority to scrutinize the administration’s antitrust enforcement decisions.
In February, regarding the proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger, Sen. Booker stated that the scheduled Antitrust Subcommittee hearing was “more necessary than ever,” and that he intended to “exercise Congress’ oversight authority and scrutinize this deal.” He further warned at the time that “if this Congress does not act, Democrats are committed to getting it done when we retake the majority.”
Rep. Raskin is also expected to convene hearings in the House.
Legislative Proposals
Democrats in the House and Senate have also previewed a variety of legislative proposals aimed at reviewing merger approvals, increasing transparency in federal antitrust enforcement and strengthening judicial oversight of agency settlements. While it may be unlikely that President Donald Trump would sign these proposals into law, they could frame the policy conversation in Washington over the next two years, particularly given populist and progressive sentiments around affordability, healthcare, big tech and artificial intelligence (AI).
Tunney Act amendments. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Rep. Raskin have introduced companion versions of the Antitrust Accountability and Transparency Act, which would significantly expand the Tunney Act’s requirements for judicial review of federal antitrust settlements. The legislation would extend judicial review under the Tunney Act to FTC settlements in addition to DOJ settlements.
It would also require the government to provide additional information about settlements and disclose further information about communications with government officials, including the White House. The bill would also establish hold-separate requirements of up to 90 days to allow courts to review proposed settlements before mergers are consummated.
In addition, the legislation would amend the judicial review standard, requiring courts to assess whether the settlement creates a “material risk of violating the antitrust laws” and whether the settlement is “reasonably tailored to the violations … alleged in the complaint,” instead of whether the settlement is in the “public interest.”
Finally, the legislation would give state attorneys general the opportunity to take over federal antitrust cases that the DOJ or FTC proposes to dismiss, as well as an increased role in the settlement review process.
Review of mergers approved under the Trump administration. Sens. Booker and Warren have introduced the CLEAN Mergers Act, which would require the unwinding of any merger valued at $10 billion or more that was consummated during the Trump administration, absent a showing that the transaction did not harm competition.
The proposed act would further direct federal agencies to reexamine those transactions for evidence of potential improper political influence. It would also extend the time frame for state attorneys general to challenge mergers from four years to 10 years.
Legislative Scrutiny May Impact Agency Priorities
While the agencies will not be directly impacted by the change in congressional control and are likely to continue their business-friendly approach to antitrust enforcement, the looming Democratic oversight of antitrust enforcement could reduce the involvement of the White House in antitrust and make nonconventional resolutions of antitrust actions less likely.
Current and future vacancies are also likely to be impacted by a Democratic Senate that may be unwilling to confirm President Trump’s nominees.
At the FTC, the Commission currently has only two sitting commissioners — Chairman Andrew Ferguson and Commissioner Mark Meador — following President Trump’s firing of the Democratic commissioners in 2025. While the all-Republican Commission has generally been aligned on enforcement priorities, the current makeup creates the possibility of deadlocks, as occurred in at least one recent investigation.
There have also been reports that Chairman Ferguson was considering exiting the Commission prior to being named vice chair of the Super Intelligence Force, an AI-focused task force formed by President Trump. If Chairman Ferguson does choose to exit in the future, the Commission would potentially be left with just one commissioner.
At the DOJ, the Antitrust Division’s leadership transition remains ongoing. President Trump’s nomination of Adam Candeub for assistant attorney general advanced to the Senate floor in September. Candeub may be confirmed during the lame-duck session, before the new Congress takes office.
If he is not confirmed before January, a Democratic-controlled Senate could complicate his confirmation. Regardless of who serves as assistant attorney general, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, who currently oversees the Antitrust Division, is expected to continue playing a significant role in shaping enforcement policy.
Woodward has touted the Division’s introduction of a more streamlined merger review process, emphasizing the importance of reducing burdens on merging parties and negotiating settlements where appropriate, rather than pursuing litigation. (See our October 7, 2026, summary of Woodward’s speech at the Fordham Law School’s 53rd Annual Conference on International Antitrust Law and Policy.)
While the agencies are likely to continue to pursue their business-friendly approach to antitrust enforcement, Democratic oversight could orient regulators toward a more cautious and conventional approach to antitrust enforcement.
Democratic investigations into nonconventional settlements and enforcement decisions over the last two years — and the involvement of the White House in those decisions — may temper the willingness of regulators to continue those practices moving forward and may impact the extent to which companies pursue nonconventional remedies or how they deploy lobbying efforts.
On net, these factors could result in increased antitrust enforcement compared to the last two years, even if the overall regulatory environment remains business-friendly.
Takeaways and a Look Ahead
Ultimately, Democratic control of the House and Senate is expected to bring a substantial shift in congressional scrutiny of federal antitrust enforcement, which may impact the approach at the agencies.
- Democratic leaders are expected to hold hearings to scrutinize the Trump administration’s antitrust enforcement priorities and decisions. While the focus will likely be on retrospective assessments of past settlements and enforcement decisions, Democrats may also hold hearings on and investigate prospective transactions involving big tech, AI or politicized areas, or those with a strong consumer and “cost-of-living” nexus.
- While Democratic legislative proposals are unlikely to be signed by President Trump, bipartisan bills targeting aspects of antitrust policy could pass and ultimately be signed into law. Regardless of enactment, consideration of antitrust legislation may shape the conversation in Washington over the next two years and heading into the 2028 presidential election.
- The environment at the agencies will likely continue to be more business-friendly compared to recent administrations. However, potential congressional investigations into past enforcement decisions could curb some novel enforcement practices that characterized the first two years of the second Trump administration, potentially leading to an uptick in antitrust enforcement.
This memorandum is provided by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and its affiliates for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended and should not be construed as legal advice. This memorandum is considered advertising under applicable state laws.