Washington, D.C. — Following news that the Federal Trade Commission will appeal Judge James Boasberg’s decision in FTC v. Meta last year, which ruled that Meta does not hold an illegal social media monopoly, the American Economic Liberties Project released the following statement.

“We believe Judge Boasberg’s decision should be overturned and hope this appeal is designed to uphold antitrust law on behalf of consumers and competition, not simply an attempt to extort concessions from Meta on behalf of a corrupt administration and the parasitic lobbyists surrounding it,” said Matt Stoller, Research Director at the American Economic Liberties Project. “Bipartisan commissions are useful because they enable controversial and difficult decisions to occur without having to question motives. President Trump’s illegal firing of Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter looms even larger now.”

Last year, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against the Federal Trade Commission in its long-running case seeking to unwind Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. The FTC originally sued in December 2020, arguing that Facebook bought both apps (Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014) to block rising threats in the personal social networking market. After an early dismissal in 2021, the court let a strengthened complaint move ahead in 2022, leading to years of discovery and a six-week trial in the spring of 2025.

In his final Order, Judge Boasberg ruled that the FTC had not proven Meta currently holds monopoly power in the market for “personal social networking services” (or friends and family sharing), largely because he folded TikTok and YouTube into the same market and concluded that their popularity reduces Meta’s share below illegal levels.

The heart of the lawsuit concerns Meta’s deliberate strategy to eliminate competitive threats. Internal documents show that Facebook acquired Instagram because it was easier to buy than compete, especially as users shifted to mobile. The WhatsApp deal, likewise, was driven by fears the messaging app could grow into a rival social platform. Instead of innovating, Meta chose to neutralize its competitors — a textbook violation of the antitrust laws meant to protect consumers and foster competition. Meta has meanwhile argued that it faces rigorous competition from other social media platforms, like LinkedIn (professional networks), TikTok (short-form video entertainment), Twitter (professional and news content) and YouTube (long-form video content). But contemporaneous records reveal that Meta and other social media executives understood that users flock to different platforms for different purposes, and that Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp were specifically designed to operate in a distinct submarket for family and friend connections.

Learn more about Economic Liberties here.

###

The American Economic Liberties Project works to ensure America’s system of commerce is structured to advance, rather than undermine, economic liberty, fair commerce, and a secure, inclusive democracy. Economic Liberties believes true economic liberty means entrepreneurs and businesses large and small succeed on the merits of their ideas and hard work; commerce empowers consumers, workers, farmers, and engineers instead of subjecting them to discrimination and abuse from financiers and monopolists; international trade arrangements that promote balanced trade and benefit workers, farmers and small businesses; and wealth is broadly distributed to support equitable political power.