Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 JULY 2026

Antitrust Agency Insights: Developments At The U.S. Antitrust Enforcement Agencies — Second Quarter 2026

Arnold & Porter
Arnold & Porter
Contributor
Arnold & Porter

Arnold & Porter

With over 1,000 lawyers across 16 offices worldwide, Arnold & Porter is renowned for its...

View firm profile
Explore more from Arnold & Porter

The U.S. antitrust enforcement agencies are signaling a potential shift in their approach to merger remedies, with recent settlements incorporating behavioral provisions alongside traditional divestitures. This development raises critical questions about when conduct-based relief may be acceptable and how parties should structure remedy proposals to address competitive concerns while preserving deal value.

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law

Letter From the Editors

Traditionally, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC or the Commission) and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ or DOJ Antitrust) have used pre-litigation merger settlements to resolve challenged deals. Although such remedies fell out of favor during the Biden administration, FTC and DOJ leadership in both Trump administrations have accepted divestitures to resolve competitive concerns. In most instances, the agencies have decried behavioral remedies as ineffective relief to anticompetitive mergers and acquisitions. Recently, however, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward has reportedly told DOJ Antitrust to seek settlements1 and the FTC has signaled a potential willingness to consider behavioral remedies in settlements.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from