Inside Competition: May 2026

Inside Competition is designed to help companies identify key legal developments in antitrust and competition law in the United States and beyond.

In addition to reporting on antitrust litigation and enforcement actions over the previous month, this bulletin addresses policy developments, regulatory trends, and agency priorities shaping competition law today. 

Our goal is to provide insights that help businesses identify risk, respond to investigations, and compete in a rapidly evolving legal landscape.

Civil litigation

Ninth Circuit allows challenge to extraterritorial application of California’s Cartwright Act. On April 27, 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Altria and JUUL’s petition for review of a ruling certifying several classes of e-cigarette purchasers in an antitrust case challenging Altria’s investment of USD12.8 billion for a 35 percent stake in JUUL. Reasoning that the Cartwright Act applies extraterritorially, the district court had certified an indirect-purchaser class under California’s Cartwright Act that included non-Californians who purchased JUUL outside California. In support of their petition, Altria and JUUL argued that applying the Cartwright Act to out-of-state purchases contradicts California’s presumption against extraterritoriality and conflicts with other states’ interests in applying their own laws to in-state transactions. 

Second Circuit declines to revive Ivy League athletes' suit over scholarship ban. In Choh v. Brown University, case number 24-2826, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of a putative class action on April 2, 2026. Plaintiffs alleged that Ivy League universities and related entities conspired not to provide athletic scholarships or other compensation to Division I athletes in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Applying the rule of reason, the panel held that plaintiffs failed to plead a plausible relevant market, finding that their own complaint acknowledged academically selective schools such as Stanford as interchangeable substitutes and that their alternative “Ivy-plus” market lacked coherent boundaries. The court distinguished NCAA v. Alston, reasoning that no individual conference like the Ivy League possesses the monopsony power exercised by the NCAA itself.

Eighth Circuit affirms dismissal of farmers’ antitrust suit against agricultural companies. On April 6, 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of the consolidated class action In re: Crop Inputs Antitrust Litigation. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants conspired to boycott e-commerce sales platforms and obscure pricing data for seeds and crop-protection chemicals, thereby allegedly inflating prices in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The Eighth Circuit held that the complaint failed to adequately plead parallel conduct, finding that the allegations consisted of conclusory assertions of conspiracy and impermissible group pleading that did not identify which defendants allegedly took specific actions. The court further concluded that the allegations referring to individual defendants were not sufficiently similar in substance, timing, or effect to suggest coordinated behavior.

JPML consolidates growing wave of fire apparatus antitrust actions. On April 3, 2026, the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a transfer order in In re: Fire Apparatus Antitrust Litigation, centralizing twelve actions in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The JPML determined that the actions involved common factual questions arising from allegations that the fire truck manufacturer defendants used their market power to fix, raise, maintain, or stabilize the price of fire trucks nationwide by allegedly restraining production or exchanging competitively sensitive information. Since then, the JPML has issued four additional transfer orders consolidating antitrust cases filed by municipalities, fire districts, and authorities in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Utah.

Criminal enforcement

Former Air Force Master Sergeant pleads guilty to bid-rigging scheme involving IT contracts for the US Air Force. Alan Hayward James, a former US Air Force Master Sergeant, pleaded guilty to a nine-year conspiracy to commit wire fraud, bid rigging, and bribery – including allegedly channeling bribes to a federal public official in the US Pacific Air Forces. Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Daniel Glad stated that the US Air Force overpaid by more than USD37 million as a result of the scheme. The plea agreement details that, beginning in 2016, the conspirators falsely inflated information technology (IT) contract costs and used the excess funds to pay James and his coconspirators. For several years, James directed his coconspirators on the amounts they should submit for government contracts. James faces up to 20 years in prison and will pay at least USD1,451,656.80 in restitution. 

Fuel executive sentenced to five years for defrauding US Navy. Jasen Butler, the owner of Independent Marine Oil Services LLC, was sentenced to five years in prison following his conviction on charges of wire fraud, forgery, and money laundering. Butler manipulated the competitive bidding process for military fuel contracts and submitted falsified documentation to US warships, collecting more than USD4.5 million in fraudulent payments. When Navy officials began investigating, Butler concealed his identity and posed as an employee of a nonexistent fuel-related department. The DOJ Antitrust Division and the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida prosecuted the case.

DOJ enters non-prosecution agreement with Broadway Across America over non-compete. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a non-prosecution agreement with Broadway Across America (BAA) after conducting a criminal investigation into a written arrangement that barred a rival live entertainment company from competing with BAA across 44 markets in the US and Canada. Under the agreement, BAA committed to full cooperation, acknowledged the relevant facts, and agreed to strengthen its antitrust compliance program. In return, the DOJ Antitrust Division agreed to forgo criminal or civil charges against BAA and its affiliates. It also stated that legal advice asserting that such a non-compete complies with antitrust law is “clearly erroneous,” and that an advice-of-counsel defense is inapplicable to a general intent crime.  

FTC urges Tennessee Supreme Court to open up law school accreditation. On May 1, 2026, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) staff – joined by the US Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee and DOJ Antitrust Division officials – sent a letter to the Tennessee Supreme Court urging it to reduce reliance on the American Bar Association (ABA) for law school accreditation. In response to the court’s invitation for comment on whether it should modify its dependence on ABA standards, the letter argued that the ABA’s accreditation framework imposes a costly model of legal education that restricts the supply of lawyers and increases costs for consumers seeking affordable legal services. The letter highlighted that the Florida and Texas Supreme Courts have already dropped their express reliance on ABA standards and left open the possibility of alternative accrediting bodies. The FTC authorized the letter by a unanimous two to zero vote.

Civil enforcement

DOJ challenges NYP’s payor contracting restrictions. On March 26, 2026, the DOJ Antitrust Division and the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York filed suit alleging that The New York and Presbyterian Hospital (NYP) violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The DOJ alleges NYP imposes contractual plan-design restrictions that block insurers from offering lower-cost plans. These provisions allegedly bar plans that exclude NYP, place it in a less-preferred tier, or offer lower copays at rival hospitals. The DOJ claims the restrictions limit plan choice, increase healthcare costs, and insulate NYP from price competition.

FTC secures USD10 million settlement with StubHub for deceptive ticket pricing. On April 9, 2026, the FTC announced a settlement with StubHub for violating the FTC Act and the Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees. The FTC alleged that StubHub deceptively advertised ticket prices across the first three pricing displays on its website without clearly and conspicuously disclosing the total price, including all mandatory fees. Under the proposed order, StubHub is required to pay USD10 million in consumer refunds and is prohibited from failing to disclose the total prices more prominently than other pricing information. 

DOJ opens investigation into NFL subscription fees. On April 9, 2026, the DOJ opened an investigation into the National Football League (NFL)’s subscription charges to consumers. The probe focuses on the distribution and pricing of NFL games across various platforms. The investigation follows a letter from Senator Mike Lee requesting a review of the NFL’s streaming platform exemptions and whether its streaming package fees are consistent with the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961. 

State enforcers push for parallel remedies proceedings after jury verdict against Live Nation. On April 15, 2026, the jury in US et al. v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. et al., found that Live Nation and its Ticketmaster unit monopolized ticketing services for large music venues and unlawfully tied venue access to its concert promotion services. This development follows Live Nation entering a mid-trial settlement with the DOJ on March 9, 2026, which allowed Live Nation to retain Ticketmaster in exchange for other conditions (as reported in our April 2026 issue of Inside Competition. However, state enforcers have deemed the DOJ settlement insufficient and have reportedly indicated their intent to seek a forced sale. State enforcers requested that the court proceed with remedies discovery in parallel with the Tunney Act review. 

Merger review and challenges

Federal court blocks Nexstar-Tegna merger pending resolution of antitrust suit. On April 17, 2026, US District Court Chief Judge Troy L. Nunley extended an emergency order blocking Nexstar Media Group’s proposed USD6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna while an antitrust lawsuit brought by eight states and DIRECTV proceeds. Although the transaction had received approval from the Federal Communications Commission and DOJ, the merger would result in Nexstar owning 265 television stations across 44 states and the District of Columbia, including two or three “Big Four” local network affiliates in 31 markets. The court concluded that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits, finding that the transaction could lead to increased consumer prices, reduced programming quality and access, and diminished local journalism. Nexstar has announced its intent to appeal the ruling, arguing that the transaction has cleared the required regulatory approvals and will expand local journalism.

Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chair flags competition concerns over proposed RV components “merger of equals”. On April 21, 2026, Senator Mike Lee, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights, sent letters to LCI Industries Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Jason Lippert and Patrick Industries CEO Andy Nemeth seeking detailed information regarding the companies’ publicly confirmed merger discussions. The letters stated that the proposed transaction would combine two of the largest US suppliers of recreational vehicle (RV) components, creating a supplier of “considerable scale across multiple component categories critical to RV manufacturers.” They cautioned that the transaction could substantially increase Herfindahl–Hirschman Index concentration across several overlapping product categories – including chassis systems, electronics, furnishings, and structural materials. According to the letters, this would potentially raise concerns under Section 7 of the Clayton Act and the DOJ and FTC’s 2023 Merger Guidelines. The letters also cite potential risks related to pricing power, reduced incentives for research and innovation, and diminished supply chain resilience resulting from fewer sourcing alternatives. Senator Lee requested written responses by May 5, 2026 covering transaction status, Hart Scott Rodino preparation, internal competitive-effects analyses, post-merger pricing strategy, customer concerns, and integration plans. 

Senator Blumenthal calls for DOJ investigation into sale of WNBA’s Connecticut Sun. US Senator Richard Blumenthal urged the DOJ to open a formal antitrust investigation into the Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA)’s handling of the Connecticut Sun’s sale, alleging that the league manipulated the bidding process. The Houston Rockets’ owner purchased the Connecticut Sun for USD300 million, despite reportedly higher offers from other bidders, including a USD325 million proposal from a Celtics minority owner. Senator Blumenthal contends that the sale may have violated the Sherman Act, stating the WNBA “muscled everyone out and dictated that [the Connecticut Sun] go to Houston.” 

Recent legislation

Maryland enacts state-level ban on surveillance pricing in food retail. On April 28, 2026, Maryland enacted the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act (HB 895), becoming the first state to prohibit grocers and third-party food delivery services from using certain forms of consumers’ personal data to set individualized food prices. The statute focuses on personal data-driven pricing increases while preserving ordinary retail practices, including loyalty and promotional programs, discounts, and market-based adjustments. Enforcement authority is vested exclusively in the state Attorney General, with no private right of action. Effective October 1, 2026, the statute reflects a growing national trend of state-level efforts to regulate surveillance pricing. Read our client alert on this development here.

International

European Union

Revised EU Merger Guidelines forthcoming. The European Commission is expected to publish its revised European Union (EU) Merger Guidelines shortly. Ongoing discussion surrounding the revisions has focused on the potential role of concepts such as efficiency gains, global competitiveness, strategic autonomy, and European champions, which have featured prominently in debates over the EU's industrial policy. The increased emphasis on these concepts reflects a broader discussion among policymakers and stakeholders regarding whether substantive merger assessment should account not only for traditional competition assessment tools, but also for the wider economic and strategic objectives – particularly in sectors considered critical to European sovereignty and innovation. Although the precise contours of the draft guidelines remain unknown, public commentary suggests that the European Commission is exploring how EU merger control policy could interact with broader industrial resilience and global competitiveness objectives amid evolving geopolitical dynamics. 

The April 2026 edition of DLA Piper’s Antitrust Bites newsletter covers other EU antitrust developments, including the European Commission’s Revised Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation and Guidelines on the application of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to technology transfer agreements.

Germany

European Commission clears RTL / Sky DACH without conditions. On April 22 2026, the European Commission unconditionally approved RTL’s acquisition of Sky DACH, concluding that the transaction would not significantly reduce competition in the relevant audiovisual and advertising markets. The transaction combines the RTL+ and Sky platforms, including WOW, and is expected to create Germany’s third-largest streaming provider. The European Commission’s decision included express recognition of the growing pressure exerted by global streaming platforms on European media operators.

United Kingdom

UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rejects Atlantic salmon collective proceedings order application. In Waterside Class Limited v. Mowi ASA and others, the United Kingdom (UK) Competition Appeal Tribunal declined to certify proposed collective proceedings, finding that the budgeted legal costs of the claim outweighed the sums anticipated to be returned to the class. The proposed consumer damages claim arises from the European Commission's cartel investigation into several Atlantic salmon producers and alleges harm to UK consumers through inflated prices. The Tribunal determined that the proposed class representative had not presented evidence showing that the potential recovery for the class would be proportionate to, or exceed, the costs of the proceedings, noting that its illustrative calculations indicated that projected costs exceeded any sums likely to be returned. The Tribunal also declined to authorize the proposed class representative, citing inadequate assessment of the costs and benefits of the proceedings. Rather than striking the claim, the Tribunal invited the class representative to reformulate the application for a collective proceedings order, suggesting a reduction of the legal budget and a creative mechanism for the distribution of any damages.

Hungary

Below-threshold Hungarian media merger triggers warning from the EU Media Board. On April 10, 2026, the European Board for Media Services issued its first opinion under Article 23(1) of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) concerning a merger of two Hungarian media entities completed in October 2025. The resulting media market concentration fell below national and EU merger control thresholds and therefore was not notifiable to competition authorities. Under Hungarian law, the Media Authority exercises merger control only when a transaction is reported to the Hungarian Competition Authority. Media transactions below national merger control thresholds, or those notifiable to the European Commission, may avoid review by the national Media Authority. The Media Board’s opinion raises concerns regarding the transaction’s potential effects on media pluralism and editorial independence in Hungary. While the opinion carries no binding legal effect under Article 288 of the TFEU, it demonstrates that the EMFA’s soft-law mechanism may enable EU-level scrutiny of media transactions that fall outside traditional merger review frameworks. Two days after the opinion’s release, the governing party led by Viktor Orbán lost the parliamentary elections, and the incoming opposition, led by Péter Magyar secured a supermajority. This development may be relevant to future legislative consideration of the Hungarian Media Act in the context of EMFA requirements.

Poland

SOKiK upholds LPP for in-house counsel while UOKiK challenges independence of employed lawyers. In recent rulings concerning enforcement measures, including cases XVII Amz 28/25 and XVII Amz 21/25, the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (Sąd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów, or SOKiK) confirmed that legal professional privilege under Polish law may extend to correspondence involving in-house legal advisers who hold a professional qualification. This determination diverges from the narrower interpretation maintained by the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów, or UOKiK), which is based on the view that in-house lawyers may lack the requisite independence and that internal legal correspondence therefore falls outside the scope of legal professional privilege. This divergence affects both the scope of documents subject to inspection or seizure during dawn raids and the procedural safeguards available to businesses subject to competition enforcement.

Contacts

Learn more about our Antitrust and Competition practice by contacting our editors and contributors:

Managing Editors: Gregory J. Casas (Austin), Becky L. Caruso (Short Hills), Emily Collins (Austin)

Administrative Editors: William Conway (Washington, DC), Janie Rowland (Austin), Claire Smith (Austin)

Contributors: Brian J. Boyle (Philadelphia and Washington, DC), Mandy Chan-Lucero (San Francisco), Daniel Colgan (Brussels), Amanda Cooper (Los Angeles), Thomas Corrigan (Phoenix), Stephen Cosenza Jr. (San Francisco), Deyanira Cuellar Sandoval (San Francisco), Sander De Volder (Brussels), Matt Evans (London), Gábor Fejes LL.M (Budapest), Dr Justus Herrlinger (Hamburg), Alexandra Kamerling (London), Emily Kral (Washington, DC), Dr Jonas Kranz LL.M. (Hamburg), Jack Mansur (Philadelphia), Kayla Martin-Blue (Philadelphia), Paolo Morante (New York), Antonia Mordino (Washington, DC), Caroline C. Olsen (Washington, DC), Michal Orzechowski LL.M. (Warsaw), Amadeu Ribeiro (New York and São Paulo), Jeremy Sher (London), Sam Szlezinger (London), Claus Wenzler (London)

 

^{For professional responsibility reasons, these summaries may not include discussions of developments relating to certain matters.}