The White House recently introduced the “America’s AI Action Plan,” aiming to strengthen the United States’ position in developing and deploying artificial intelligence technologies. However, current antitrust actions from federal agencies could affect some of the country’s leading technology firms that are at the forefront of AI innovation.
Two ongoing Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuits against Google are moving quickly, with one set for a remedy judgment in the coming month. These cases seek remedies that go beyond addressing specific anticompetitive practices, including proposals to break up Google and require it to share data with competitors. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has also filed an antitrust suit against Meta, seeking to force the sale of Instagram and WhatsApp due to concerns about past acquisitions. In addition, Amazon is facing a major FTC complaint that calls for potential structural changes such as breaking up parts of its business. Apple is under scrutiny in a DOJ case, while Microsoft faces an ongoing FTC investigation.
These legal actions reflect an area of agreement between the Biden administration’s Neo-Brandeisian approach to antitrust policy—led by former FTC Chair Lina Khan—and proponents of “America First Antitrust” like DOJ Antitrust Division head Gina Slater and new FTC Commissioner Mark Meador. Both sides argue for protecting consumers from concentrated power in both government and private sectors. As Meador stated in his essay “Antitrust Policy for the Conservative,” “Big is bad.”
The article argues that size alone should not be seen as negative, especially given the scale required for advancements in machine learning and AI development. Building such technologies demands significant resources—including data, computing power, and capital—that only large companies can provide efficiently. Major tech firms have pledged $320 billion toward AI development in 2025 alone (https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/big-techs-ai-spending-2024-c44e53a2). Additionally, these companies often acquire startups, providing crucial exit opportunities for venture capital investors and supporting innovation through investments in emerging AI businesses (https://www.reuters.com/technology/big-tech-bets-startups-ai-race-intensifies-2024-03-12/).
There are historical precedents where aggressive antitrust enforcement weakened American industry leaders while boosting foreign competition. Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, cited Xerox as an example: prolonged antitrust litigation led to Xerox losing market dominance to Japanese competitors despite consumer price benefits.
Supporters of America First Antitrust are urged to consider global competition—particularly from China—when shaping domestic policy. The outcome will influence not just national security but also global standards for AI ethics and design.
The article concludes by suggesting that while oversight remains important, antitrust enforcement should target clear legal violations rather than focusing on company size alone or on protecting competitors at the expense of broader U.S. interests. It quotes Michael Kratsios from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy: “a cornerstone of American innovation, powering a new age of American leadership in science, technology, and global influence.” The call is made for an antitrust approach aligned with supporting U.S.-led technological progress.
