The Sprint and T-Mobile Merger Will Test the Department of Justice's Mettle

[Commentary] Is our government bound by the rule of law or the rule of President Trump? The Department of Justice's Antitrust Division must consider this question. Here's why. There is a two-part, simple legal standard for deciding whether the proposed combination of Sprint and T-Mobile should be allowed. Would it harm competition in such a way that consumers would suffer? And, even if some competitive harm is likely, will the resulting merged firm be able to operate so much more cheaply—and be forced by competition to pass those savings along to consumers—that consumers will end up paying less? In the Sprint-T-Mobile case, the answers to these questions are clear: Yes, millions of consumers would have fewer choices if the two companies merged, because the number of national mobile providers would be reduced from four to three—Verizon, AT&T, and a newly giant T-Mobile. Although Sprint and T-Mobile claim that combining forces will allow them to make the capital investments necessary for 5G services, there is little or no chance that any of these futuristic cost savings will be passed on to consumers.

[Susan Crawfors  a professor at Harvard Law School]