Policy

Republican tech skeptics are flirting with progressives' choice for antitrust chief

Groups on the left have largely backed longtime Google critic Jonathan Kanter to lead the Justice Department's antitrust section.

Republican tech skeptics are flirting with progressives' choice for antitrust chief

President Joe Biden has yet to nominate anyone for the antitrust chief position.

Photo: Pool/Getty Images

Longtime Google critic Jonathan Kanter is quickly becoming the preferred choice of tech skeptics on both sides of the aisle to lead the Justice Department's antitrust division and its case against Google, sources tell Protocol.

The preference for Kanter over his potential rival, Obama administration alumnus Jonathan Sallet, is the latest instance of progressive and conservative tech critics finding common ground over their anger at dominant tech companies, even as they struggle to find solutions they can agree on, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions happening on Capitol Hill.

"Kanter would have a much cleaner confirmation hearing," Rachel Bovard, senior director of policy at the Conservative Partnership Institute, told Protocol of her discussions about the "key position" with lawmakers. "He seems to have more trust among Senate Republicans right now than Jon Sallet does."

President Joe Biden has yet to nominate anyone for the position, and the slim Democratic majority in the Senate might mean that votes from conservative anti-tech lawmakers such as Sens. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Marsha Blackburn and Josh Hawley wouldn't be necessary for confirming any nominee. But if any Democrats defected, Republican votes could fill out the total. Those four senators' positions on the Judiciary Committee also mean they can make a nominee's confirmation process more — or less — bumpy, regardless of how they vote.

The competition

Republican members of the Judiciary Committee who are curious about Kanter haven't necessarily decided how they would vote, and would likely still have issues with his broader liberal views on competition law, a Republican senior staffer told Protocol, but they generally prefer him to Sallet.

"No Republican is choosing Jonathan Kanter to head up DOJ antitrust" in isolation, the aide, who asked not to be named, said about the lawmakers' thinking. "That being said, with those two choices, it's not particularly close."

The Republicans in question view Sallet as one of the people who let the tech giants grow out of control in the first place, sources said. Sallet served in President Obama's antitrust division and later as general counsel of the Federal Communications Commission, where he was a key figure in implementing net neutrality regulations that conservatives tend to despise.

More recently, Sallet worked as a staffer for Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser to help build one of the major multistate antitrust suits against Google currently in progress.

Kanter, too, has supported an antitrust case against Google, but members of the Biden administration have reportedly expressed concerns Kanter's stance might pose ethics problems if he gets the job. Advocates for Kanter's nomination contend that it's ethical to fight alleged antitrust violations from within the department after complaining about them from the private sector, although regulations limit government lawyers' ability to work on some issues involving their recent clients or those of a former firm.

Still, Kanter has received support from progressive advocacy groups such as Public Citizen and MoveOn, members of Congress including Rep. Mondaire Jones, and seemingly even former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The stakes

The stakes are perhaps highest right now for Google, specifically. Big Tech skeptics hope whoever ends up at the top of the antitrust division would demand harsher penalties in any potential settlement talks with Google, push aggressively in court for a breakup and maybe even launch additional cases to encompass conduct not in the current complaint. The Justice Department in the past two years has also investigated Facebook, Apple and other tech companies. Any one of those probes by itself could theoretically remake whole markets that consumers across the world rely on, and set far-reaching court precedent.

Although some Republican lawmakers have spent decades championing policies friendly to big business, many increasingly view the largest tech companies as menaces that must be reined in lest they deliberately use their dominance to suppress conservative speech. That leaves them open to a nominee like Kanter, despite his roster of progressive support.

Social media companies such as Twitter and Facebook say their choices to ban accounts and limit the reach of certain content are attempts to help mitigate offline harms. Private companies have a fairly broad legal right to limit speech on their platforms as they see fit, but tension between platforms and conservative lawmakers grew significantly in 2020 as companies combatted political misinformation and false claims that President Donald Trump won the November election.

The result is nervous agreement between right and left tech critics on certain regulators and policies, such as the possible consensus that is emerging on Kanter. Hawley, for instance, recently said he was "very impressed" with Lina Khan, who Biden has nominated to the Federal Trade Commission — although the Missouri Republican said he hadn't made up his mind on voting for Khan, a progressive law professor known for her scholarship criticizing Amazon.

"Both sides have a view, and in some ways that view is complementary, that the tech platforms have far too much power," said Sarah Miller, executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project, one of the progressive groups pushing for Kanter. "How that manifests is different, but there is some alignment in various quarters that that power is deeply problematic."

The divisions

Still, Kanter fans on both sides said they were largely operating independently. Some of the conservatives also said they worried that Biden's team might lean toward Sallet if it knew that tech skeptics on the right preferred Kanter.

Among lawmakers, deep splits also remain on the problems with, and solutions for, tech — meaning any Republican interest in Kanter may remain essentially a private matter. Lee, the top Republican on the Senate's antitrust subcommittee, has balked at what he cast as Khan's ideological view of competition law, and his House counterpart, Rep. Ken Buck, recently voted against adopting the Democratic-led panel's blockbuster report on competition in big tech despite working extensively on it.

Both Buck and Lee have suggested that, while they think a handful of tech companies have gone too far, the federal government should still take a hands-off approach with most businesses. After all, the head of the antitrust division would not just be in charge of the existing case against Google. That person will also decide whether to launch investigations, seek to block mergers or file monopoly lawsuits against companies across the economy.

Left-leaning lawmakers and groups contend that other industries, such as pharmaceuticals, insurance, airlines and more are also dangerously concentrated, but conservatives as a group have shown little interest in a wholesale revamp of competition law outside the tech sector. Some business groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have also begun to push back, saying giant corporations and small firms alike live in fear of the cost of such an expansion in antitrust enforcement.

Bovard of the Conservative Partnership Institute, though, said she has talked to progressives about Kanter, and both sides should be more open to the alignment, at least on Google, Facebook and other tech companies.

"It's a sad commentary on where our political moment is," she said. "You just have to focus on the problem at hand and talk less about the politics of it."

Workplace

Is it legal to fire someone while they’re on parental leave?

Twitter is in chaos right now. But that’s still not a good reason to fire someone while they’re on parental leave.

Kayvon Beykpour was terminated during his parental leave.

Screenshot: Twitter

This week, Twitter fired the company’s head of Consumer, Kayvon Beykpour, in the latest shakeup related to the Elon Musk deal.

According to Beykpour’s tweet, the senior executive was on paternity leave after welcoming a daughter last month. This brings up a lot of questions around the ethics — and legality — of firing someone while they’re on parental leave.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Foursquare data story: leveraging location data for site selection

We take a closer look at points of interest and foot traffic patterns to demonstrate how location data can be leveraged to inform better site selecti­on strategies.

Imagine: You’re the leader of a real estate team at a restaurant brand looking to open a new location in Manhattan. You have two options you’re evaluating: one site in SoHo, and another site in the Flatiron neighborhood. Which do you choose?

Keep Reading Show less
Fintech

Crypto is crumbling, and DeFi hacks are getting worse

The amount of crypto stolen in the first quarter of 2022 has already surpassed criminal hackers’ 2021 haul. There aren’t any easy fixes.

The biggest hacks of 2022 were carried out by attackers spotting vulnerabilities in smart contracts and protocols, especially in cross-chain bridges and flash loan protocols.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Until recently, DeFi seemed like it was on an exponential trajectory upwards. With the collective value of crypto peaking near $3 trillion, hackers saw a big opportunity. The only thing that may slow them down is the precipitous drop in the value of the tokens they’re going after.

DeFi hacks have been getting worse and worse, with no clear solutions in sight. According to a recent report by blockchain security firm PeckShield, the amount of money netted from DeFi hacks in the first four months of 2022, $1.57 billion, has already surpassed the amount netted in all of 2021, $1.55 billion. A report by Chainalysis found a similar trend, with the hacker haul in the first three months of 2022 exceeding a record set in the third quarter of 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Lindsey Choo
Lindsey Choo is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. She is a graduate of UC San Diego, where she double majored in communications and political science. She has previously covered healthcare issues for the Center for Healthy Aging and was a senior staff writer for The UCSD Guardian. She can be reached at lchoo@protocol.com.
Policy

Privacy by Design laws will kill your data pipelines

The legislation could make old data pipelines more trouble than they’re worth.

Data pipelines have become so unwieldy that companies might not even know if they are complying with regulations.

Image: Andriy Onufriyenko/Getty Images

A car is totaled when the cost to repair it exceeds its total value. By that logic, Privacy by Design legislation could soon be totaling data pipelines at some of the most powerful tech companies.

Those pipelines were developed well before the advent of more robust user privacy laws, such as the European Union’s GDPR (2018) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (2020). Their foundational architectures were therefore designed without certain privacy-preserving principals in mind, including k-anonymity and differential privacy.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at hchitkara@protocol.com.

Enterprise

Why AI-powered ransomware could be 'terrifying'

Hiring AI experts to automate ransomware could be the next step for well-endowed ransomware groups that are seeking to scale up their attacks.

Ransomware gangs don’t have AI ransomware. At least not yet.

Photo: Max Duzij/Unsplash

In the perpetual battle between cybercriminals and defenders, the latter have always had one largely unchallenged advantage: The use of AI and machine learning allows them to automate a lot of what they do, especially around detecting and responding to attacks. This leg-up hasn't been nearly enough to keep ransomware at bay, but it has still been far more than what cybercriminals have ever been able to muster in terms of AI and automation.

That’s because deploying AI-powered ransomware would require AI expertise. And the ransomware gangs don’t have it. At least not yet.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at kalspach@procotol.com.

Latest Stories
Bulletins