SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"We applaud Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee that stood up against his harmful proposal to ensure this amendment landed where it belongs—on the cutting room floor," said one antitrust advocate.
House Republicans on Wednesday dropped an effort to hamstring the Federal Trade Commission's ability to fight corporate consolidation after antitrust advocates, Democratic lawmakers, and news outlets—including Common Dreams—highlighted and sounded the alarm over the proposal.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, agreed during a markup hearing Wednesday to remove the proposal from the panel's section of the GOP's sprawling reconciliation package—though he indicated he would try to revive the proposal as a standalone bill at a later date.
The reversal came after Democrats on the panel, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Becca Balint (D-Vt.), ripped the proposal as a disaster for small businesses and consumers.
"Why would you go after the FTC and make it harder for small businesses to survive in this landscape?" Balint asked in fiery remarks at Wednesday's hearing. "You all talk about competition... and then you go after the FTC. It doesn't make any sense, and it doesn't pass the straight-face test."
"Why would you go after the FTC and make it harder for small businesses to survive in this landscape? You all talk about competition... and then you go after the FTC. It doesn't make any sense." pic.twitter.com/8EF8AOmW8m
— American Economic Liberties Project (@econliberties) April 30, 2025
Jordan ultimately relented and the House Judiciary Committee voted to remove the section in question, which would have transferred the FTC's antitrust staff and funding to the Justice Department—which doesn't have the same statutory authority to protect the American public from "unfair methods of competition."
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, said in a statement that Jordan and other Republicans on the judiciary panel "did the right thing scrapping a proposal that would have kneecapped antitrust enforcement against our economy’s most harmful monopolies."
"We applaud Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee that stood up against his harmful proposal to ensure this amendment landed where it belongs—on the cutting room floor," said Harper.
But Jordan made clear following Wednesday's hearing that he did not agree to remove the FTC proposal from the reconciliation package out of genuine concern about its implications for the future of antitrust enforcement.
Rather, he accepted Republican senators' warnings that the proposal wouldn't comply with the rules of the budget reconciliation process.
"We'll just do it in a standalone bill," Jordan told Punchbowl.
"Jim Jordan and House Judiciary Republicans are directly undermining both current and future litigation against the monopolies that gouge and censor Americans."
House Republicans are set to consider legislation on Wednesday that experts say would effectively eliminate a law that gives the Federal Trade Commission sole authority to protect the American public from corporations engaging in "unfair methods of competition."
The GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), released the bill Monday as part of a sweeping, filibuster-proof reconciliation package that Republicans are looking to pass as soon as next month.
The new bill states that "all FTC antitrust actions, all FTC antitrust employees, all FTC antitrust assets, and all FTC antitrust funding" must be "transferred to the attorney general." The proposal is virtually identical to Republican legislation that Elon Musk, a lieutenant of President Donald Trump and the richest person in the world, endorsed earlier this year.
Matt Stoller, research director at the American Economic Liberties Project, observed Monday that the House Judiciary Committee measure is "not just a bill to change the office locations and reporting structures." Specifically, Stoller noted that the bill doesn't explicitly transfer to the Justice Department the FTC's authority under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to combat "unfair methods of competition."
"That authority," Stoller wrote, "remains with an agency that has no staff and no capacity to litigate, which means it could die."
Alvaro Bedoya, who is currently engaged in a legal fight to get his job back at the FTC after Trump fired him and another Democratic commissioner last month, echoed Stoller's concerns, writing on social media that the Republican bill "doesn't transfer the laws that FTC enforces, or authority to enforce those laws."
"This will gut the FTC," Bedoya wrote, noting that the agency's legal action against pharmacy benefit managers—pharmaceutical industry middlemen—would likely be among the casualties of the Republican bill, given that "the sole law that the FTC alleges was broken in all three counts was that core prohibition against 'unfair methods of competition.'"
Stoller pointed out in his blog post that Section 5 is also used "in the antitrust case against Amazon" and "another case against Corteva/Syngenta over exclusive dealing in seeds and chemicals." It was also "the authority used to ban noncompete agreements," he wrote.
"These cases, as well as every consent decree ever reached under Section 5, are now at risk," Stoller added.
The House Judiciary Committee is slated to mark up the legislation on Wednesday afternoon, starting at 2:00 pm ET.
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday that the measure as a whole is "laden with language attempting to protect corporate wrongdoers."
"One provision appears to effectively eliminate the FTC pro-competition division," said Gilbert. "Another set of provisions makes significant changes to the already overreaching Congressional Review Act. One measure says that major rules that raise revenue go into effect only if Congress proactively approves them. Another section says for the next four years Congress has to affirmatively approve rules for them not to expire."
"If made law," she warned, "this would sign a death warrant for a slew of important consumer, worker, and environmental protections."
"Palestinian students deserve to speak on the genocide of their families," said one protester as they were led out of the room by police.
The limits of the Republican-led U.S. House Judiciary Committee's views on freedom of speech were on full display Wednesday shortly after a hearing on "Free Speech on College Campuses" began, when several pro-Palestinian rights demonstrators were removed from the hearing room and arrested for speaking out.
The committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), invited representatives of conservative and pro-Zionist groups including Young Americans for Freedom and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to speak about what Jordan called "hostility towards certain points of view, in particular conservative points of view" amid growing outrage over Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza and the West Bank.
"With 'safe spaces' and 'free speech zones' aiming to protect students from violence," Jordan said in his opening remarks, "one would think Jewish students would have somewhere to turn as violent, pro-Hamas students take to their demonstrations and have harmed students on college campuses. That's not the case, as we will see in today's hearing."
But as the hearing got underway, protesters who were among the majority of Americans who support a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war currently raging in Gaza were promptly kicked out of the room for demanding that lawmakers consider how their speech has been suppressed since the war began.
One student demanded to know when speaking out against genocide "became antisemitism" as she reminded the committee that more than 4,200 children in Gaza have been killed by Israeli forces so far as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing government continues to insist it is targeting Hamas in retaliation for the group's October 7 attack on southern Israel.
"What is your right to speech if all of us are not free?" asked the protester as she was pulled out of the room by Capitol Police.
The Hill reported that 10 demonstrators were arrested after interrupting the hearing to say "Free Palestine," "Free Gaza," and "End the siege and the occupation now."
Journalist Dima Amro reported that police confiscated the protesters' keffiyehs and took them to the Capitol Police headquarters.
Jordan cited a "nearly 400% increase in antisemitic incidents, including harassment, vandalism, and assault" in the two weeks after the Hamas attack, but did not mention that the nation's largest Muslim civil rights group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, reported that anti-Muslim violence and harassment reports tripled in October.
Despite their focus on free speech on college campuses, Republicans on the committee also did not appear disturbed by a call by the ADL and Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law—both of which were represented at the hearing—for universities to investigate campus chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
The groups accused SJP of "celebrating terrorism" and said it should be investigated for potentially "providing material support to Hamas."
Last week, the ACLU expressed its strong opposition to "any efforts to stifle free speech and association on college campuses, and urged universities to reject calls to investigate, disband, or penalize pro-Palestinian student groups for exercising their free speech rights."
"We recognize that colleges and universities are managing heightened threats and anguished tensions on their campuses while trying to keep students safe—and we take those concerns seriously," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the ACLU. "The devastating conflict in Israel and Palestine has embroiled campuses here at home, sometimes resulting in speech that includes terms we vehemently disagree with or even find offensive and repugnant. Yet it's precisely in times of crisis and fear that university leaders must remain firm in their commitment to free speech, open debate, and peaceful dissent on campus."
"A blanket call to investigate every chapter of a pro-Palestinian student group for 'material support to terrorists'— without even an attempt to cite evidence—is unwarranted, wrong, and dangerous," Romero added. "It echoes America's mistakes during the McCarthy era and is counterproductive. We urge college and university leaders to hold fast to our nation's best traditions and reject proposals to restrict constitutionally protected speech."
At the hearing Wednesday, one demonstrator told the committee that "Palestinian students deserve to speak on the genocide of their families" and called for lawmakers and universities to "stop silencing Palestinian students."
Jordan's hearing also follows the spreading of misinformation about pro-Palestinian rights demonstration at the University of California, Los Angeles and other schools where students chanted, "Israel, Israel, you can't hide: We charge you with genocide!" Social media users claimed the protesters were calling for a "Jewish genocide."
On Tuesday, Jordan and nearly all other House Republicans were joined by 22 Democrats in voting to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American member of the House, for her defense of the phrase "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," which is commonly used at Palestinian rights protests.
"You are not offering a plurality of opinion," one protester told Jordan, "you are offering partisanship, and you are offering murder to more Gazans."