4 Minutes
The US government shutdown is having an uneven impact on the Justice Department and FTC antitrust cases against Big Tech. Two major lawsuits—those targeting Apple and Amazon—are paused, while high-profile cases against Google and Meta continue to move forward.
Why Apple and Amazon got a legal time-out
Federal judges granted the government’s requests to pause proceedings in the Apple and Amazon suits until federal funding is restored. Amazon’s trial isn’t scheduled to begin until February 2027, and Apple’s legal team faces depositions and discovery that extend into January 2027. With key DOJ and FTC resources furloughed or constrained, judges agreed a temporary hold was appropriate for those cases.
Those pauses give both companies breathing room. For Apple, slowing discovery delays the timetable for potentially disruptive remedies. For Amazon, the long lead time to trial means the pause mainly affects pretrial preparation and evidence collection.
Why Google and Meta are still in the dock
Not all antitrust actions were paused. Two of Google’s cases—including the search-engine suit and a separate DOJ action over online advertising—continued despite the shutdown after judges denied requests to delay. Judge Amit Mehta of the D.C. district court refused the government’s pause request in the search case, pointing to precedent: antitrust litigation persisted during the 2019 shutdown.
Judge Mehta has already spelled out large parts of his approach, including limits on exclusive agreements that force partners to use only Google Search. But his rulings still allow Google to pay device makers like Apple and Samsung for default-search status—a key commercial reality for search market competition. A hearing to finalize some of those rulings was scheduled for October 8th, and the judge expressed a desire to wrap up the matter regardless of the funding status.
Different judges, different choices
Judges have wide discretion to decide whether litigation pauses are warranted. Courts can require the FTC and DOJ to continue work if a judge orders it—even during a shutdown—but practical limits exist: many agency lawyers and support staff may be furloughed or working without pay.
Wayne State law professor Stephen Calkins suggested Judge Mehta may be pushing forward because he wants to finish before rapid technology shifts change the stakes. "My guess is that Mehta is almost done with this and wants it resolved before technology changes … whereas Amazon and Apple are much earlier," Calkins said.
Vanderbilt professor Rebecca Haw Allensworth emphasized fairness when deciding whether to proceed: judges must balance the burden on government lawyers who may be unpaid against the need to keep cases moving. "If you ask an entire trial team to go to trial on furlough, that seems pretty unfair," she noted.
Practical and procedural ripple effects
- FTC and DOJ resource limits: Some teams can’t complete discovery or trial prep without funding.
- Judicial discretion: Courts can keep cases alive if a judge finds it fair to do so.
- Timing matters: Cases closer to resolution—like parts of Google’s—are likelier to continue than those early in discovery.
- Long-term stakes: Pauses can delay remedies that would reshape business units or contractual practices across tech industries.
The federal judiciary said it would remain operational through at least October 17, using fee balances and other nonappropriated funds—echoing the 2018 shutdown, when courts stayed open for five weeks despite funding gaps. But the practical effect will vary by case, judge and the amount of unpaid work the government’s legal teams are expected to perform.
In short: the shutdown hasn’t stopped antitrust scrutiny of Big Tech, but it has altered the timetable. That shifting calendar could matter nearly as much as the legal outcomes themselves—especially in fast-moving tech markets where rules decided today may look very different in a year.
Source: phonearena
Leave a Comment