Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan fended off Republican attacks over her adherence to ethics laws and aggressive antitrust enforcement at a heated congressional hearing Thursday, during which she was labeled a “bully” and told her leadership was “a disaster.”
(Bloomberg) — Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan fended off Republican attacks over her adherence to ethics laws and aggressive antitrust enforcement at a heated congressional hearing Thursday, during which she was labeled a “bully” and told her leadership was “a disaster.”
Kahn calmly defended her participation in a case involving Meta Platforms Inc. despite a recommendation from the agency’s top ethics officer, explaining that she had no financial stake in that company or any others that the FTC is investigating.
“There was no ethics violation created by my participation,” Khan told the House Judiciary Committee, adding she consulted with ethics officials and followed the recommended framework in making her decision. “I have not a penny in financial stock.”
Republicans alleged that Khan gave “misleading testimony” before Congress in April over her participation in the case, a contention she denied outright.
The hearing into oversight of the FTC took a contentious turn right at the start when Chair Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, called her stewardship of the FTC “a disaster” and questioned whether the agency’s curbs on Twitter Inc.’s privacy practices were politically motivated since Elon Musk bought the platform last March. Jordan and Wyoming Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers sent Khan a letter Wednesday accusing her of creating a “toxic” environment at the FTC and under-enforcement of merger and privacy laws.
Read More: Lina Khan’s Bad Week Dims Hopes for New Era of Tech Antitrust
Khan also defended the agency’s decision to appeal a ruling in favor of Microsoft Corp.’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard Inc. Republicans criticized the FTC’s record of merger losses, asking if she was “losing on purpose” to influence Congress to pass antitrust legislation.
“We fight hard when we believe there is a law violation,” she said. “When we get an adverse ruling, our teams look closely at the text of opinion and see if there are errors on matters of law that warrant an appeal.”
–With assistance from Daniel Papscun.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P.