President Donald Trump has, across two administrations, sought to lower drug prices for Americans, most recently with executive order “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients.” Margherita Colangelo explains why his order is unlikely to accomplish its goal.

Skewed incentives and the distribution of resources toward corporations have undermined the integrity of scientific research and contributed to the public's distrust in expertise. Matt Lucky explores the political economy of scientific research and potential reforms to bring scientific research closer to its ideals. Various scholars and commentators have lamented the crisis of public trust [...]

Reed Showalter argues that the suggestion that antitrust can be ringfenced from democracy or the democratic process is erroneous. Antitrust is fundamentally a body of law designed to meet citizens' basic needs, sustain the marketplace of ideas, and protect democracy and the rule of law. This article is the final contribution to a symposium that [...]

Yunsieg P. Kim argues that economic regulation, including antitrust, can only be democratic if it is the choice of well-informed citizens. This article is part of a symposium that explores the relationship between democracy and antitrust. In theory, Congress passes laws, the antitrust agencies implement them through rules and policies, and the courts assure these [...]

Erik Peinert explores the paradoxical relationship between economic concentration and democracy, where economic concentration compromises the democratic process and democratic backsliding also gains momentum by taking advantage of concentrated market actors, whose political power is now impotent, to capture civil society.

Sean Sullivan discusses the role public opinion should play in setting antitrust policy and what should be left to the expert economists.

Gerhard Schick discusses the CumEx and CumCum share-trading scandals that cost German taxpayers billions of euros over the course of several decades and the failures in political and social institutions that allowed these scandals to persist for so long.

President Trump claims not to have a list of people for the government to punish but he has already specified some individuals alongside now-indicted former FBI Director James Comey. Experts question the fees investors are paying the U.S. government to buy TikTok from its Chinese owners. Though they are supposed to be protected from deportation, some DACA recipients have been detained.

The U.S. government will collect a multibillion-dollar fee from the American investors who will take over TikTok. Some experts call the fee and other deals like it "extortion."

Max von Thun and Claire Lavin argue that the European Commission must revise its merger guidelines to emphasize how competition policy can protect goals beyond prices, including innovation, security, and democracy. This will create a more prosperous European Union.

Surya Gowda reviews Branko Milanović’s Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War and how his analysis of class and inequality applies to contemporary America.

Erik Hovenkamp and A. Douglas Melamed discuss what Judge Amit Mehta got right and wrong in his remedy decision in the Google Search antitrust case.

In new research, Kenneth Coriale, Ethan Kaplan, and Daniel Kolliner show how the Republican Party has benefited more from redistricting and gerrymandering. Their research has important implications for political power and representation in today's era of razor-thin Congressional majorities.

In new research, Tomaso Duso, Joseph Harrington, Carl Kreuzberg, and Geza Sapi demonstrate how their screening tool can aid antitrust authorities in identifying potential collusion between firms through public communications.

In new research, David Gindis and Steven G. Medema trace Henry Manne’s entrepreneurial role in the development of the field of law and economics, beginning with a failed venture to bring together econ...

In new research, Adam Callister, Andrew Granato, and Belisa Pang argue that differing incentives faced by plaintiffs and defendants in "battles of the experts" litigation (like securities suits) leads to structurally higher spending by defendants on expert witnesses. These incentives also apply to any class action suit and many individual suits. They argue that courts should take this dynamic into account and correspondingly be more aggressive in using authority to employ court-appointed experts.

Fabio De Pasquale, a prosecutor at the Milan prosecutor’s office who led the investigation into energy conglomerates Eni and Shell for their alleged involvement in the OPL 245 corruption scandal (both companies have since been found not guilty), discusses how the case reflects the failures of international anti-corruption efforts. ProMarket is publishing a series of articles […]