Law360's Pro Say - News & Analysis on Law and the Legal Industry · Law360 - Legal News & Analysis

DOJ Keeps Losing Antitrust Labor Cases. Why?

·38 min·2 clips

The Sixth Circuit said Hardwick had no standing and wrote, 'Seldom is so ambitious a case filed on so slight a basis.'

1. Law360’s Pro Say covers DOJ labor antitrust enforcement, a Sixth Circuit PFAS class-action loss, a Lizzo anti-SLAPP fight, and a sentencing update on Alec Murdoch. 2. Amber McKinney hosts with Alex Lawson and Haley Knoth, and Brian Koenig joins as Law360’s senior competition reporter to explain the antitrust section. 3. The episode asks why the DOJ keeps losing criminal no-poach and wage-fixing cases after making labor-market antitrust a priority in 2016. 4. Haley Knoth reports that the Sixth Circuit decertified an 11 million-person Ohio PFAS class and told the lower court to throw out the case. 5. The PFAS discussion centers on Kevin Hardwick, an Ohio firefighter who alleged exposure from foams, contaminated gear, and PFAS found in his blood. 6. The hosts note that Hardwick originally sought a nationwide class of about 330 million Americans before the Ohio court narrowed it. 7. Amber McKinney explains that the Ohio class covered people subject to Ohio law with a blood concentration of 0.5 parts per trillion of any PFAS. 8. The panel’s standing analysis turns on Article 3 injury in fact, traceability, and redressability through medical monitoring. 9. Haley quotes the Sixth Circuit’s opening line, 'Seldom is so ambitious a case filed on so slight a basis.' 10. Brian Koenig says the DOJ’s labor-antitrust push began in 2016 with joint DOJ-FTC guidance for HR professionals. 11. He says the division later started filing criminal cases in late 2020 after years of treating no-poach and related conduct civilly. 12. Koenig explains that the DOJ has secured guilty pleas in one company and one executive, but no prison sentences on the labor charges. 13. He says juries have acquitted every time these charges reached them, and one Connecticut judge threw out a case under Rule 29. 14. Koenig distinguishes no-poach or non-solicitation agreements from wage-fixing arrangements that cap pay at a set level. 15. He says the DOJ dropped the Surgical Care Affiliates case, a UnitedHealth unit matter, with only a statement about conserving court time and resources. 16. He adds that defense lawyers argue the conduct should be treated under the rule of reason because there is often still some worker mobility. 17. The Lizzo segment focuses on a California anti-SLAPP motion tied to a suit by dancers Ariana Davis, Crystal Williams, and Noel Rodriguez. 18. Amber McKinney and the hosts describe the tone as quick-moving, conversational, and packed with legal-news detours and pop-culture references. 19. Listeners interested in antitrust enforcement, class actions, and entertainment litigation would get the most from this episode. 20. Listeners wanting a single-topic deep dive or no pop-culture digressions might skip it.

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Law360's Pro Say - News & Analysis on Law and the Legal Industry