In a high-stakes legal battle that could redefine the limits of antitrust enforcement in the digital age, Meta Platforms Inc. has formally requested a federal judge to rule in its favor and dismiss the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) ongoing antitrust lawsuit. Meta argues that the FTC has failed to substantiate its claim that the company holds an unlawful monopoly in the social networking space.

Background of the Case

The roots of the FTC’s lawsuit date back to December 2020, when the agency first filed a complaint against Meta — then known as Facebook Inc. — alleging that the company had engaged in anti-competitive practices by acquiring nascent rivals such as Instagram (2012) and WhatsApp (2014). These acquisitions, according to the FTC, were part of a deliberate strategy to neutralize competition and maintain Meta’s dominance in the social media ecosystem.

The case was initially dismissed by a judge in 2021 due to lack of concrete evidence, but the FTC refiled an amended complaint in 2021 under the leadership of Chair Lina Khan, a noted antitrust reform advocate. The new complaint expanded the scope of allegations and focused on how Meta allegedly suppressed competition to maintain its market power.

Meta’s Defense and Latest Legal Move

In a motion filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Meta contended that the FTC has failed to provide compelling evidence to prove that the company holds a monopoly or has harmed consumers through its business practices. The tech giant is asking Judge James Boasberg to issue a summary judgment — a legal decision made without a full trial — effectively throwing out the case before it proceeds further.

Meta’s legal team argues that:

• The FTC’s definition of the social networking market is overly narrow and ignores competition from platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, and emerging decentralized networks.

• The agency has not shown that Meta’s past acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp caused demonstrable harm to competition or consumers.

• The FTC has not demonstrated that Meta’s business practices have led to price increases or diminished innovation — two key criteria in proving monopolistic harm.

"After years of discovery and expert analysis, the FTC still has not shown that Meta possesses monopoly power or that it acquired Instagram and WhatsApp unlawfully," Meta's filing states. "The law demands more than suspicion or theory."

FTC’s Position

While the FTC has yet to formally respond to the latest motion, the agency previously maintained that Meta’s acquisitions created “a fortress” around its social networking empire, blocking competition and solidifying its power for over a decade. In its amended complaint, the FTC accused Meta of using its size and influence not to compete on the merits but to eliminate emerging threats before they could flourish.

FTC Chair Lina Khan has emphasized a broader approach to antitrust enforcement, focusing not just on consumer prices but on innovation, privacy, and market structure. The case against Meta has become a flagship example of the agency's new aggressive stance.

Implications of the Case

The outcome of this lawsuit could have profound implications for the tech industry. A win for Meta would be a major setback for U.S. regulators seeking to rein in Big Tech through antitrust enforcement. It might also discourage similar future lawsuits aimed at breaking up dominant tech platforms based on past acquisitions.

On the other hand, if the FTC is allowed to proceed and ultimately wins, it could set a precedent for unwinding major corporate mergers — a move rarely seen in U.S. legal history. Such an outcome could open the floodgates to more aggressive challenges to tech industry consolidation.

What’s Next?

Judge Boasberg is expected to review Meta’s motion and could issue a decision in the coming months. If the court denies Meta’s request, the case would proceed to trial, potentially later in 2025.

As both sides brace for the next phase of the battle, legal experts say the case will serve as a critical test of how U.S. antitrust law is applied to modern digital platforms that dominate user attention, data, and advertising markets — even when their services appear to be free.