PolicyPulse.pro

DOJ Outlines How It Shares Local Merger Reviews with State Attorneys General

the state of utah building lit up at night
Photo: Photo by Alex Moliski on Unsplash

The U.S. Department of Justice says it will generally defer to state enforcers on mergers whose competitive effects are confined to local markets, while retaining a role in transactions with regional, national, or broader antitrust significance. It reports recent partnerships, referrals, and joint investigations with state Attorneys General.

28.10.2026 | Department of Justice


The U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division has provided an update on its collaboration with state Attorneys General in merger investigations involving predominantly intrastate effects. The Department says federalism guides it to focus its resources on mergers with regional or national implications, but it may investigate local transactions when they raise an antitrust issue of national significance.

Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward, Jr. said the Department generally forms its own view on the appropriate resolution of mergers of national importance, though it may work with state enforcers that can make a distinct contribution. Deputy Assistant Attorney General G. Charles Beller said federal and state enforcers have different constituencies and competencies, and that enforcement should defer to the level of government best placed to address the interests involved. State leadership may be appropriate where a state is a purchaser facing direct injury or where potential competitive effects are limited to one state.

The Department reported that, since January 2026, it partnered with the Attorneys General of California and Tennessee to secure consent decrees with merging parties in the cement and asphalt industries. The measures addressed potential competitive harm in regions within those states. The California matter involved Taiheiyo Cement Corporation and CalPortland Company’s acquisition of ready-mix concrete assets from Vulcan Materials Company; the Tennessee matter concerned asphalt competition in western Tennessee.

The Antitrust Division also referred investigations into local asphalt markets in New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey to the relevant state Attorneys General, who later reached settlements with the parties to address competition concerns in those markets. The Division says it has also jointly investigated local and multistate mergers with state enforcers when the issues warrant involvement at both levels, and has consulted closely with state Attorneys General in other investigations involving local matters.

Consult source

Terms of ServicePrivacy PolicyCoverage
LinkedInFollow us on LinkedIn

© 2026 PolicyPulse. All rights reserved.