Link harvest: Good Discussion of EU Antitrust and Google

A good discussion of the EU antitrust decree against Google and the issue of "digital monopoly."
https://stratechery.com/2017/ends-means-and-antitrust/

I'll caveat, btw, that the author does fall into the trap of being annoyed at the Apple antitrust case bcause Amazon=evil. Apple offered to create a price fixing deal among the 5 major book publishers. This was a victory for competition? I'm happy to say Amazon exercises undue market power in the retail market these days (an issue that will be debated as part of its acquisition of Whole Foods). But that does not mean that anyone who offers to build a monopoly to fight it is hero. I'll point out Amazon was initially celebrated as introducing competition into a marketplace dominated by the same 5 publishers and 2 major retailers (Borders and Barnes & Noble).

But to return to the substance. The basic thesis, which I think is correct, is that the EU antitrust policy values competition as positive in and of itself. By contrast, US antitrust has evolved to look exclusively at whether monopoly behavior harms consumers -- usually with a very narrow focus on pricing. (How do you determine pricing in a monopoly market? An excellent question!)

Anyway, it's a good read for those interested in the subject. it is written in plain English not econo speak.

Link harvest: Clean Air Council v. Pruitt (methane stay)

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/A86B20D79BEB893E85258152005CA1B2/$file/17-1145-1682465.pdf

Important on Admin law and likely more important in the current Admin (it is no coincidence that the cases relied on are from the early Reagan era). When an agency stays its action pending review, is that "final agency action" subject to agency review. Court holds yes, with the majority rejecting Brown's dissent that while a denial of a stay is final agency action, grant of a stay is not. The rest is relevant to "logical outgrowth test" but mostly falls under the specifics of the Clean Air Act (note FCC has very different reconsideration statute).

Brown's dissent is typical of the anti-regulatory bias of the Federalist society. A decision to "relieve" an industry of a regulatory obligation is not considered a judicially reviewable action because -- in Brown's view -- this simply restores the natural order of the universe. Only denial of a stay constitutes a final agency action, because then the actual rule goes into effect. As the majority points out, the decision to exempt industry from otherwise extant legal obligations is a "determination of rights and obligations" under the Administrative Procedure Act.