One reason Meta Platforms prevailed in an antitrust trial where the US Federal Trade Commission sought to break up the company is because the case took too long, a senior Texas antitrust enforcer said Monday.
One reason Meta Platforms prevailed in an antitrust trial where the US Federal Trade Commission sought to break up the company is because the case took too long, a senior Texas antitrust enforcer said Monday.“The FTC … just lost the Meta case that's up on appeal now, partly because it took so long to litigate,” Thomas York, head of the Texas Attorney General’s Antitrust Division, said at an event.*
The FTC had sought to unravel Meta's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp — each made more than a decade ago. The lawsuit was brought in December 2020, under the first Trump administration, and it went to trial in April 2025 after having survived Meta’s motion for summary judgment in 2024.
US District Judge James Boasberg handed the FTC a loss in November, finding that Meta lacked monopoly power in the market for personal social networking services and must contend with the likes of TikTok, its “fiercest rival” (see here).
The agency, which is now pursuing an appeal (see here), filed a suit in December 2020 seeking to unravel Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
— ‘Funky enforcement incentives’ —
A related New York-led multistate lawsuit accusing Meta of monopolizing the social networking market failed to make it to trial, in part because a panel of District of Columbia appeals court judges determined the claims were too “old” (see here).
Timing also played a key role in the FTC’s loss (see here).
“Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now,” Boasberg’s order said. “The Court’s verdict today determines that the FTC has not done so.”
To win the permanent injunction sought in the case under the FTC’s authority under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, Boasberg said, the FTC must prove a current or imminent legal violation.
Earlier during the same event, FTC Commissioner Mark Meador spoke at length about resource constraints, technocratic antitrust enforcement philosophies and defendant litigation strategies that can cause cases to drag on.
“Texas was involved, as were a bunch of other states,” York said Monday. “This isn't just Texas taking it on the chin here, but part of the issue in the Meta case was looking at Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, trying to understand the markets and trying to understand the harm without heavy regulatory intervention.”
After “realizing the harm later,” York continued, the states brought an after-the-fact lawsuit.
Boasberg’s dismissal of the states’ case on timeliness grounds under the doctrine of laches, and dinging the FTC under 13(b) “creates some funky enforcement incentives — to use a technical term — that may lead to overenforcement,” York said.
The judge’s ruling in the Meta case was not “the right decision,” according to York, and creates “perverse incentives” that enforcers are struggling to navigate.
“If we do nothing, does it allow a company to create and maintain monopoly power through anticompetitive conduct? “If we do something, do we deter innovation?”
"The Washington Antitrust and Digital Markets Forum," organized by MLex, George Washington University Competition Law Center, Forum Global, Washington, DC, March 23, 2026.
Please e-mail editors@mlex.com to contact the editorial staff regarding this story, or to submit the names of lawyers and advisers.