A collection of states filed a multi-state lawsuit Wednesday accusing Facebook of suppressing its competition through monopolistic business practices meant to preserve the company’s outsized power. Fourty eight attorneys general across 46 states are behind the lawsuit, with only South Dakota, South Carolina, Alabama and Georgia declining to join.
The lawsuit, which looks at Facebook’s actions throughout the company’s history, alleges that the company bought competitors “illegally” and in a “predatory manner.” The suit cites Facebook’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp as prominent examples.
In the suit, the collection of states asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to “restrain Facebook from making further acquisitions valued at or in excess of $10 million” without notifying the plaintiff states in advance. The lawsuit also asks the court for “any additional relief it determines is appropriate, including the divestiture or restructuring of illegally acquired companies, or current Facebook assets or business lines.”
The suit was led by a committee of attorneys general from California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and the District of Columbia, with New York Attorney General Letitia James spearheading the effort.
“Almost every state in this nation has joined this bipartisan lawsuit because Facebook’s efforts to dominate the market were as illegal as they were harmful,” James said. “Today’s suit should send a clear message to Facebook and every other company that any efforts to stifle competition, reduce innovation, or cut privacy protections will be met with the full force of our offices.”
The state antitrust action against Facebook materialized the same week the FTC votes on its own antitrust suit against the social media giant. That vote will tie a bow on a 20-month long investigation into Facebook’s business, including its acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram — two formerly independent apps that were folded into the social giant’s business.
Facebook has been regularly criticized for its outsized influence and repeatedly been called to testify before Congress on antitrust issues, but the coordinated state antitrust effort marks a challenging new chapter for the company.
