Insights

New York – February 24, 2026: William Reiss, a first-chair litigator with nearly 25 years of experience in leading complex antitrust class actions, has joined Crowell & Moring as a partner in the firm’s Antitrust and Competition Group in New York.

Washington – December 2, 2025: Crowell & Moring’s Antitrust and Competition Group has been recognized as one of “the world’s best competition practices” by Global Competition Review’s 2026 “GCR 100.” GCR ranked Crowell as “recommended” in California, Washington, D.C., and both the Belgium and Brussels categories. The firm was also ranked as “highly recommended” in New York.

Washington – July 15, 2025: Crowell & Moring was honored to represent MP Materials in its landmark partnership with the U.S. Department of Defense, making DoD the company’s largest shareholder. On July 9, MP and DoD signed a multibillion-dollar package of investments and long-term commitments, providing for, among other things, construction of the company’s second domestic magnet manufacturing facility. The agreements include convertible preferred equity, warrants, loans, and price floor and offtake commitments.

On April 15, 2026, a federal jury found Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster liable on every antitrust count submitted, including monopolization of primary ticketing markets and illegal bundling of its promotions and venue business lines. The jury found the defendants liable for $1.72 for each primary concert ticket sold pursuant to the anticompetitive conduct.[1] The trial opened March 2, 2026, before Judge Arun Subramanian in the Southern District of New York, as a case brought by the federal government and a coalition of states. The case, however, was rocked by an early-trial settlement between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the defendants. Although the DOJ and six of the plaintiff states (Arkansas, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota) exited the trial, 33 states and the District of Columbia rejected the settlement, brought in a law firm, and moved forward with the trial. Next up for the case: (1) a statutorily required Tunney Act review of the DOJ’s settlement; (2) defendants’ Rule 50 and Rule 59 motions; (3) determination by the Court of how many tickets are subject to the $1.72 damage award (before trebling as per the Clayton Act); and (4) a remedy phase where the Court will consider plaintiffs’ likely proposal to sever Ticketmaster from Live Nation.

In Danziger et al. v. U.S., No. 25-cv-1241 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 10, 2026) (a Crowell & Moring case), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking breach of contract damages for improper terminations in bad faith and/or abuse of discretion. The case involves hundreds of contractors for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), who were terminated in 2025 in connection with the dismantling of USAID. The government sought to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead bad faith or abuse of discretion. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the complaint was “replete with allegations implicating bad faith,” and specifically rejected the “peculiar notion” “that governmental misconduct is immunized when a contracting officer acts pursuant to directives from higher-ranking officials.” The court also held that the government’s payment of certain termination costs was no defense to the contractors’ breach claim and confirmed that an improper termination for convenience entitles contractors to termination costs as well as breach damages.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026, opinion in Learning Resources. v. Trump (decided with Trump v. V.O.S. Selections), holding that the President lacks authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), is notable for many reasons — including its practical impact on the many U.S. companies who paid steep tariffs on global imports and may now be able to recover by filing suit before the Court of International Trade (CIT). That possibility and the key reasons for the High Court’s decision are discussed in our recent alert on this momentous decision.

Kenneth Dintzer

Kenneth Dintzer

Kenneth Dintzer