Home > Knowledge > Blog

Big Tech and Antitrust Law Trends Under a New Administration

May 2, 2025

Level Table DC Dinner Feature Image - Joey Daniel Avery

Highlights from our Level Table Dinner

 

The state of antitrust and competition under a new presidential administration was on the menu at our latest Level Table dinner in Washington, D.C. The Level Legal team gathered with an engaging group of lawyers from the D.C. legal community over fine food and drinks and shared a lively conversation led by our featured speaker, Avery Gardiner, Global Competition Policy at Spotify.

Gardiner shared her thoughts on antitrust law from her unique perspective working at Spotify, providing an overview of the challenges tech and media companies face and how those challenges impact and overlap with other industries. What do those challenges look like and where does Gardiner see the practice of antitrust law heading under a new regime? Read on to find out.

The Impact of the Digital Markets Act

The Digital Markets Act (DMA), passed in 2022 and in effect as of 2023, is a landmark law in the European Union that aims to “comprehensively regulate the gatekeeper power of the largest digital companies.” The law sets certain obligations for companies that it deems “gatekeepers.” Currently, seven companies are designated as gatekeepers: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Booking, ByteDance, Meta, and Microsoft.

Gardiner noted that, alongside the United Kingdom’s Strategic Market Status designation, which creates a similar regime to the DMA, these laws represent a shift from traditional antitrust doctrine for the global market. Rather than defining companies solely by their market share, the laws also contemplate the companies’ roles in controlling access between customers and other businesses.

One insight shared about these new rules is that, in practice, they are being used to favor domestic growth within their respective regions. As an example, Gardiner referenced “The future of European competitiveness,” a report by Mario Draghi, former President of the European Central Bank, which encourages the EU to increase investments in industry so the region doesn’t risk falling behind its global competition.

While the new regulations currently focus on Big Tech, Gardiner also raised questions about how these laws could be applied to other sectors, such as pharmaceuticals and transportation.

What a New Administration Might Mean for Antitrust

With the Trump administration taking the helm of the federal government just a few months ago, the full effect of new policies on antitrust and competition is still uncertain. Some of the key topics highlighted by Gardiner and discussed by the group included:

  • Enforcement as an alternative to regulation: Gail Slater, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in the U.S. Department of Justice, embraced this concept at her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. She likened regulations to a “sledgehammer” and suggested that instead wielding targeted enforcement actions as a “scalpel” is the better option.
  • An increased antitrust focus on Big Tech: Appointments and nominations (e.g., Mark Meador’s nomination for Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission) suggest that the Trump administration will look more closely at Big Tech, particularly as it relates to moderation and censorship of speech.
  • The administration’s reaction to the DMA: In its 2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, the U.S. Trade Representative identified the DMA as a trade barrier, reflecting growing tensions between the U.S. and the EU.
  • Implications for M&A: The general feeling is that non-tech M&A deals may have an easier road to approval in the Trump administration, however, tech-related mergers will face more intense scrutiny. On the other hand, as mentioned above, Gardiner noted that tech-related deals in the EU or UK may have easier paths—especially after the backlash from the UK’s initial block of the Microsoft and Activision merger.

A Rising Focus on Censorship and Content Moderation

One of the hottest topics for the attendees at our Level Table dinner discussion was content moderation and the role and responsibilities of tech companies regarding the sharing of information. The subjects covered were almost as wide-ranging as the opinions, and some of the top issues the group discussed were:

  • The role of platforms in moderating lawful but potentially harmful content
  • Whether organizations like the Global Alliance for Responsible Media lean more toward stifling competition or supporting public safety
  • Where to draw the line regarding First Amendment Rights and misinformation
  • Whether Section 230 needs to be revisited to place more meaningful legal consequences on platforms hosting harmful content
  • The difficulty of managing these concerns in a global environment with varying standards across countries

Overall, the main themes that captured the conversation at our Level Table dinner were the shaping of antitrust law as a geopolitical tool, platform governance and data control as the next big legal battleground, and the need for more clarity in new antitrust rule regimes. Where these themes will bring us over the next few years is yet to be seen, however, it’s clear that antitrust and competition practitioners will have a lot of new and interesting challenges.

We were delighted to host this incredible discussion with this group of legal luminaries. Curious about when we’re hosting our next Level Table dinner? Contact our team.

Explore More
Close Modal

Our Framework

Understand.

During this phase, we work to step away from any assumptions and guesses about what our customers needs, and let our research findings inform our decision-making. We learn more about our customers, their problems, wants, and needs, and the environment or context in which they will use the solution we offer.

Our Framework

Define.

During the Define phase, we analyze our research findings from the Understand phase and determine what is the most important problem to solve — and why. This step defines the goal. Then we can give a clear problem statement, describing what our customers’ needs are that we are trying to solve, making sure that we heard and defined their problem correctly.

Our Framework

Solve.

This phase is an important part of the discipline in our process. People often settle for the first solution, but the most obvious solution is often not the right one. During the Solve phase, we brainstorm collaboratively with multiple stakeholders to generate many unique solutions. We then analyze our potential solutions and make choices about which are the best to pursue based on learnings in the Understand phase.

Our Framework

Build & Test.

This phase is critical in developing the right solution to our customers’ problem. An organized approach to testing can help avoid rework and create exceptional outcomes. Starting small and testing the solution, we iterate quickly, before deploying solutions across the entire project.

Our Framework

Act.

During this phase, the hard work of prior phases comes to life in our customers’ best solution. The research, collaboration, and testing performed prior to project kick-off ensure optimal results.

Our Framework

Feedback.

At the project completion, we convene all stakeholders to discuss what went well, what could have been better, and how we might improve going forward. We call these meetings “Retrospectives,” and we perform them internally as a project team, and with our external customers. The Retrospective is one of the most powerful, meaningful tools in our framework.

Next