Judge James Boasberg ruled on Tuesday that Meta did not create an illegal social media monopoly when it purchased Instagram and WhatsApp.
In his decision, Boasberg, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, rejected the Federal Trade Commission‘s claim that Facebook’s parent company, Meta, monopolized the “personal social networking” platform.
“The FTC has an uphill battle to establish the contours of any separate PSN market and Defendant’s monopoly therein,” Boasberg wrote, adding that the court “ultimately concludes that the agency has not carried its burden: Meta holds no monopoly in the relevant market.”
Boasberg’s ruling comes as a loss for President Donald Trump‘s Justice Department, which brought the case against the tech giant in December 2020. Trump has intensified his criticism of Big Tech companies since accusing them of espionage and spreading disinformation campaigns during his presidential election.
The controversial decision could pave the way for the future ambitions of the $1.5 trillion tech company, as Boasberg became the second judge in recent months to refuse to break up a massive tech company.
In September, a different federal judge ruled that Google would not be broken up for allegedly monopolizing the online search market.
The two major lawsuits began during Trump’s first administration. They were seen as indicators of how receptive judges were to the government’s request to break up the world’s largest tech companies.
FTC HAS A TOUGH ROAD AHEAD TO PROVE CONSUMER HARM AND UNDO META ACQUISITIONS
Boasberg’s decision follows a six-week trial that culminated in April. The trial included testimonies from several of Meta’s executives, including a 10-hour appearance by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who argued that each of the individual platforms occupies a different role in the social media space.
The next major antitrust case expected to be taken up by a federal judge will be a similar case involving Google’s dominance of the ad exchange market. Last year, a federal judge in Virginia ruled that the company had a monopoly over ad technology, which led to a trial being held in September.
