United States

The following is part of our annual publication Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2026. Explore all topics or download the PDF.

Antitrust in 2025 was marked by policy developments and enforcement that, while remaining aggressive, became less overtly anti-business. The U.S. continued several Biden-era cases but became more open to settlements, while maintaining the new and more burdensome HSR merger notification form and the more aggressive and less economically focused 2023 Merger Guidelines. It also faced leadership uncertainty, particularly at the DOJ. The European Commission conducted DMA enforcement actions and launched a broad consultation on the Merger Guidelines. The UK CMA shifted toward a more restrained approach, taking greater account of growth and signaling flexibility in merger remedies. China’s SAMR began intervening in transactions below filing thresholds and continued using antitrust as a tool amid geo-political tensions.

On Friday, the Court in Texas v. Blackrock issued an opinion largely denying defendants’ motion to dismiss, which allows a coalition of States to proceed with claims that BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard conspired to violate the antitrust laws by pressuring publicly traded coal companies to reduce output in connection with the investment firms’ ESG commitments. The Court found that the States plausibly alleged that defendants coordinated with one another, relying on allegations that they joined climate initiatives, made parallel public commitments, engaged with management of the public coal companies, and aligned proxy voting on disclosure issues. It is worth noting that, while the court viewed BlackRock’s, State Street’s, and Vanguard’s participation in Climate Action 100+ and NZAM as increasing the plausibility of the claim in favor of denying the motion to dismiss, the Court clarified that it was not opining that the parties conspired at Climate Action 100+ or NZAM.