Economic Liberties submitted two comments to the Federal Trade Commission opposing efforts by former oil executives John Hess and Scott Sheffield to overturn key provisions of FTC merger orders. The orders bar Hess and Sheffield from joining the boards of Chevron and ExxonMobil, respectively, following those companies’ acquisitions of Hess Corporation and Pioneer Natural Resources.

As detailed in the filings, both individuals have longstanding ties to OPEC and OPEC+ and have publicly supported coordinated supply restrictions that raise gas prices for American consumers. The comments underscore that placing either executive in a board position would meaningfully increase the risk of collusion in a crude oil market already prone to anti-competitive behavior.

In its comment on the Chevron/Hess matter, Economic Liberties urges the FTC to uphold its order preventing Chevron from placing John Hess on its board of directors following its acquisition of Hess Corporation. The FTC had previously found that Mr. Hess’ documented communications with OPEC and OPEC+ officials—combined with his repeated public endorsements of supply restrictions and “stability”—posed a serious risk of facilitating coordination in the crude oil market. The comment underscores that even non-voting board members can transmit sensitive information, and that Mr. Hess’s history, including Hess Corporation’s sponsorship of an OPEC summit, made this risk more than theoretical.

The second comment supports the FTC’s decision to bar ExxonMobil from appointing Scott Sheffield to its board after acquiring Pioneer Natural Resources. The FTC’s complaint documented Mr. Sheffield’s ongoing private relationships with senior OPEC officials, his use of non-public communication channels like WhatsApp, and his explicit statements discouraging production growth in favor of price discipline. The comment also pointed to Sheffield’s concurrent service on the board of a competitor, The Williams Companies, as raising additional concerns under Section 8 of the Clayton Act. The comment urges the Commission not only to maintain the existing prohibition but to consider further investigation into potential collusive conduct.