A U.S. District Court handed Lina Khan, the head of the Federal Trade Commission, a win this week. The judge gave the go-ahead for the FTC to continue its antitrust suit against Meta, the parent company of Facebook.

The suit alleges the company pursued an illegal “buy-or-bury scheme” to root out competitors.

The court shot down the agency’s initial complaint last June, after the judge said the FTC failed to sufficiently define the social media market and the company’s share of it.

Matt Stoller is the director of research at the American Economic Liberties Project. He said there were a couple of significant changes in the complaint this time around. The following is an edited transcript of our conversation.

Matt Stoller: First, they added a lot more detail about the market. And they said, “OK, we’re going to characterize the market by time spent.” And when you do that, which is the metric that Facebook uses to their own investors, Facebook has a massive share of social media — enough to be a monopoly. And the second thing they did is they changed the narrative a little bit, and in a meaningful way. The original narrative was: “Facebook is awesome, but they did a few things that were anti-competitive.” And the new complaint said: “Facebook isn’t very good at developing technology. What happened is they just bought all their competition, and that’s why they built an empire.” And when you make that claim, when you say, “Oh, they actually were not a startup in a garage, they’re just some predators that bought their way to dominance,” then the remedy can be much more aggressive. Because people don’t think, “Oh, well, they legitimately built this thing.” It becomes a “Oh, you stole a lot of what you have.”