Insights

Washington – July 8, 2025: Crowell & Moring has secured summary judgment on behalf of longtime firm client CSX Transportation, Inc., prevailing in nearly 20 years of multi-district litigation known as In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation. Crowell and three other leading firms representing prominent rail companies led a joint defense group in one of the longest-running and most complex antitrust litigations in U.S. history.

New York – June 20, 2025: Human Rights First honored Crowell & Moring counsel Rosa M. Morales with a Pro Bono Star Award in recognition of her “outstanding dedication and commitment to pro bono representation.”

In a landmark verdict on April 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division notched its first-ever jury trial conviction for criminal wage-fixing under the Sherman Act in United States v. Eduardo Lopez in the District of Nevada. A home health care staffing executive, Eduardo (“Eddie”) Lopez, was found guilty of (1) conspiring with several competing home healthcare staffing agencies to fix the wages of home health nurses in the Las Vegas area, and (2) defrauding the unwitting buyer of his agency by concealing the then-ongoing antitrust investigation into nurse wage and hiring practices. It is worth noting, however, that while the Lopez conviction is a significant milestone for the DOJ’s campaign into labor antitrust violations, wage-fixing cases may be more straightforward to prosecute than no-poach agreements, where the DOJ still has not prevailed before a jury. This victory nonetheless affirms the DOJ’s ability to criminally prosecute labor market collusion as a criminal offense after numerous failed attempts, signaling the prudence of further caution for companies and individuals to mitigate risk in labor antitrust markets.

Four days before the change in administration and in the wake of several high-profile trial losses in cases involving alleged “no-poach” and wage-fixing agreements, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (DOJ) jointly approved new guidelines, Antitrust Guidelines for Business Activities Affecting Workers” (the “2025 Guidelines” or “Guidelines”), that explain how antitrust enforcers have identified and assessed whether an agreement or business practice affecting workers may violate the antitrust laws.  The 2025 Guidelines were voted out at the FTC on a split 3-2 vote along party lines, with a brief but scathing dissenting statement from the Republican commissioners (including incoming FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson) that raises serious doubts as to how well the Guidelines reflect the approach the agencies will take during the next four years.  On the eve of the incoming Trump Administration, the 2025 Guidelines replaced the previous joint DOJ and FTC antitrust guidelines regarding employment practices that were issued in 2016, “Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals” (the “2016 Guidelines”), during the tail-end of the Obama Administration.

Plaintiffs battling the Federal Trade Commission’s ban on non-compete clauses in employment agreements notched a significant victory recently.  On August 20, 2024, U.S. District for the Northern District of Texas Judge Ada Brown permanently blocked the agency’s action in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, concluding the rulemaking exceeded the agency’s statutory authority.  Judge Brown had previously granted a preliminary injunction that limited its effect to the plaintiffs in the case.  Yesterday’s ruling, however, which granted the plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion, permanently blocks the ban nationwide.

As federal, state, and international antitrust scrutiny of the tech industry escalates, the question is no longer whether antitrust enforcement should intensify, but how. Please save the date for the inaugural Antitrust & Tech Conference co-hosted by the George Washington University Competition Law Center and Crowell & Moring, which will focus on how antitrust enforcement involving mergers of technology companies will and should be carried out. 

When President Trump was elected, there was an assumption that there would be limited federal antitrust enforcement under his administration.  This assumption has turned out to be wildly incorrect.  Federal antitrust enforcers have challenged mega-mergers such as the AT&T/Time Warner merger.  They are actively investigating corporate hiring practices, including “no-poach” agreements among competitors and “non-compete” clauses in franchise agreements.  They are also scrutinizing the data privacy practices and growing market power of large Silicon Valley companies such as Facebook, Google, and Amazon.

Since the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission jointly released the Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals in 2016, the DOJ has been actively and increasingly investigating criminal conduct in employment practices, issuing indictments and opening companies to follow-on civil class action lawsuits. And President Biden’s recent Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the 21st Century specifically calls out labor market competition, further ratcheting up the pressure.

The 69th Annual Spring Meeting of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law is the world's largest meeting of competition and consumer protection professionals. The Spring Meeting brings together all segments of the global competition and consumer protection community - enforcement officials, private attorneys, in-house corporate counsel, academics, judges, economists, and business people - to share knowledge about all aspects of competition and consumer protection law.

Crowell & Moring panelists will discuss antitrust compliance issues for both US and European syndicated loan transactions. The session is particularly timely as the European Commission is currently reviewing potential antitrust concerns raised by syndicated lending arrangements with plans to issue a report by year end. When the Commission launched this review, it noted that syndicated lending “exhibits close cooperation between market participants in opaque or in transparent settings, such as over-the-counter (OTC) activities, which are particularly vulnerable to anti-competitive conduct.” Experienced antitrust and lending experts will: