Why is the Trump administration really appealing its Meta loss?

After a national judge ruled that Meta was not an forbidden monopolist successful a rustle against the Federal Trade Commission, the agency issued what was successful portion a emblematic connection of disappointment. Another portion of the connection was thing but: a governmental onslaught connected the judge himself.

“The platform was ever stacked against america pinch Judge [James] Boasberg, who is presently facing articles of impeachment,” FTC spokesperson Joe Simonson said successful a connection aft Boasberg released his determination successful November. Simonson appeared to reference articles revenge by a Republican lawmaker aft Boasberg issued rulings that were unfavorable to GOP lawmakers and the Trump management complete a 2020 predetermination probe and migration policies.

In precocious January, the FTC announced it would entreaty the Meta ruling. Legal experts show The Verge its determination isn’t astonishing aliases unreasonable. But the onslaught connected Boasberg, they say, casts a protector complete the determination — making the motives for what mightiness typically beryllium a regular move little clear.

“You wonderment really overmuch there’s an constituent of irritation aliases annoyance conscionable astatine Judge Boasberg himself here, and really overmuch of it is an organization determination that, ‘we’re going to show you,’” says Bill Kovacic, a erstwhile FTC chair and existent George Washington University rule professor. “This is simply a judge who the White House has criticized severely. Is location immoderate constituent present of individual animus focused connected this judge?”

Kovacic and others opportunity there’s a sensible ineligible statement against the measurement Boasberg reviewed FTC v. Meta, though the agency hasn’t yet elaborate its entreaty strategy. The lawsuit, revenge successful 2020, argues Meta crushed title by acquiring nascent rivals Instagram and WhatsApp successful 2012 and 2014 respectively. Early on, however, Boasberg said the FTC needed to beryllium that Meta maintained aliases threatened to support an unlawful societal networking monopoly arsenic of the 2025 proceedings date. By that measure, he determined, the FTC’s lawsuit grounded — mostly because of TikTok.

TikTok exploded successful fame passim the pandemic, and some Meta and YouTube invested heavy successful short-form video to compete. Its fame — which, according to soul documents, profoundly concerned Meta — convinced Boasberg that the FTC had overstated Meta’s power successful the existent day. Boasberg admitted successful his ruling that successful consequence to earlier attempts by Meta to get him to disregard the case, his orders “did not moreover mention the connection ‘TikTok.’” But astatine the clip of his 2025 ruling, “that app holds halfway shape arsenic Meta’s fiercest rival.”

Now, Boasberg’s determination to judge Meta’s monopoly by 2025 standards whitethorn go the FTC’s strongest ground to entreaty its loss. Boasberg’s mentation of the applicable timeframe arguably creates a “moving target,” says Vanderbilt rule professor Rebecca Haw Allensworth. That could discourage the agency from bringing early enforcement actions if the marketplace could displacement while litigating the case. And the appeals tribunal could — though it’s acold from definite — find it doesn’t make sense. “It conscionable creates an further consequence of losing a proceedings if facts alteration connected the crushed underneath you,” she says.

The tribunal of appeals judges won’t person to defer to Boasberg’s determination connected really to construe the law, arsenic they would for his findings of fact. They could find that Boasberg should person considered the applicable timeframe to beryllium earlier, for illustration the clip astatine which the suit was filed, erstwhile TikTok was increasing quickly but was acold smaller. Viewed done that lens, the tribunal mightiness find that Meta was a monopolist astatine the applicable clip play — though again, it’s acold from certain.

During the Biden administration, the FTC chose not to appeal a different nonaccomplishment to Meta, erstwhile it tried to challenge its projected acquisition of VR startup Within. But the matter of the ruling included a adjuvant ineligible interpretation for challenging early cases. Overall, the FTC has invested acold much clip and resources already into the societal media monopolization case, which has spanned 5 years, 2 Trump administrations and the Biden administration, truthful it’s not wholly astonishing that it wouldn’t springiness up now.

But for illustration different actions during the 2nd Trump administration, wherever formerly independent agencies like the FTC person explicitly aligned themselves pinch the White House, the onslaught connected Boasberg’s grounds has created a unreality of suspicion.

Boasberg became a target of Trump soon aft the president’s 2nd word began successful 2025. After Boasberg blocked the administration’s deportation orders past year, Trump posted connected Truth Social that he was a “Radical Left Lunatic” and “a troublemaker and agitator.” Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) introduced articles of impeachment against Boasberg past twelvemonth complete his decisions temporarily blocking the Trump management from moving guardant pinch its planned wide deportation of Venezuelan migrants and for what Gill says was his domiciled successful authorizing “frivolous nondisclosure orders” truthful that typical counsel Jack Smith could entree Republican lawmakers’ telephone records without their knowledge successful his investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 predetermination results.

Kovacic says the appeals tribunal is improbable to find individual attacks connected Boasberg compelling, but adds that it apt wasn’t the intended recipient of the PR statement. “My consciousness is the assemblage for that remark was the White House,” he says. The FTC and the White House did not instantly respond to a petition for comment. Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said successful a connection aft the FTC announced its entreaty that Boasberg’s determination was “correct, and recognizes the fierce title we face.”

There’s besides the truth that continuing pinch an entreaty whitethorn support a constituent of leverage by the management complete Meta. “One point that we cognize for judge astir Trump is that he likes to person leverage complete powerful companies, particularly media companies, that tin power nationalist opinion, and that tin beryllium politically valuable to Trump,” says Allensworth. “So he mightiness arsenic good support the lawsuit going arsenic a root of leverage.” (Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has visited Trump multiple times, and Meta agreed to salary $25 million to settee a suit brought by him.) Though the FTC was created arsenic an agency independent from the executive branch, the existent chair has aligned himself pinch the White House, calling it the Trump-Vance FTC.

Given the real, if not surefire, arguments successful the FTC’s favor, Kovacic says he assumes the determination to entreaty “is chiefly astir the merits.” But, he asks of the FTC’s comments connected Boasberg, “why are you talking astir the different stuff?”