Third-Party Effort to Enforce Google Consent Order: an EPIC Failure

, New York Law Journal


In their Antitrust Trade and Practice column, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom's Neal R. Stoll and Shepard Goldfein write: The decision in 'EPIC' that the FTC's decision whether to enforce its consent order with Google is committed to agency discretion and is not subject to judicial review clarifies just another instance where the court will simply not impose its judgment upon an administrative agency. Absent legislative intervention, the proposition that without a "mandatory discretionary duty" to enforce a consent order, the judiciary's non-intervention policy will continue to limit judicial review of agency inaction for years to come.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202548417179

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.