A yearslong fight between the Federal Trade Commission and Meta, which dates back to when it was still called Facebook, has ended with Meta prevailing, and a federal judge declaring that the company likely does not hold a monopoly in the social media sphere anymore.

Mark Zuckerberg is having a good day today, after a federal judge ruled in an antitrust case that could have turned very badly for Meta, and the social media properties that constitute its greatest hopes for future growth, Instagram and WhatsApp. In contrast to how a different federal judge ruled in two cases brought against Google/Alphabet, Facebook/Meta has been given a pass — though implicit in the ruling is the idea that Facebook and its parent company Meta don't exactly rule the school anymore in the social media universe.

As the Associated Press reports, US District Judge James Boasberg ruled Tuesday that Meta exists in a different world now than it did when the FTC first started investigating it for antitrust violations. And, Boasberg writes, at trial the FTC "continue[d] to insist that Meta competes with the same old rivals it has for the last decade, that the company holds a monopoly among that small set, and that it maintained that monopoly through anticompetitive acquisitions."

"Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now," Judge Boasberg said. "The Court’s verdict today determines that the FTC has not done so."

The lawsuit dates back to the first Trump term, several years after the company then called Facebook acquired Instagram (for $1 billion in 2012) and WhatsApp (for $22 billion in 2014). By April 2025 when this went to trial, these deals were very old news, and rivals like Twitter, Snapchat, YouTube, and TikTok had long ago changed the ways people shared content online. The FTC argued that the acquisitions, which it approved all those years ago, needed to be unwound due to evidence that Facebook sought to "neutralize perceived competitive threats" in making them.

Meta's lawyers subsequently argued that the FTC's arguments were all trapped in the past, using a "gerrymandered a fictitious market" to make the argument that Meta was a monopoly that had squeezed out competitors Snapchat and MeWe — ignoring TikTok, Twitter, and YouTube completely, and what the hell is MeWe?

Further, Meta argued that neither WhatsApp nor Instagram were particularly successful before Facebook acquired them — this is debatable — and that they only became so huge thanks to the company's efforts. And, the lawyers contended that Facebook/Meta had made all sorts of acquisitions over the years, many of which went nowhere. Why should these two acquisitions be treated differently?

Judge Boasberg, an Obama nominee to the federal bench, was clearly swayed by these arguments. And in a statement Tuesday, Meta expressed gratitude, saying the ruling "recognizes that Meta faces fierce competition" in today's marketplace.

Furthering Zuckerberg's of-late ass-kissing of Trump, the statement continues, "Our products are beneficial for people and businesses and exemplify American innovation and economic growth. We look forward to continuing to partner with the Administration and to invest in America."

The campaign that began under Trump 1.0 to stick it to Silicon Valley Democrat CEOs — many of whom, including Zuck, have since turned tail, kissed the ring and thrown money at him — may finally be winding down.  

A federal judge last year ruled that Google/Alphabet did have a monopoly over web search, but in ruling on the remedy this past September, that judge stopped short of forcing the company to spin off its web browser Chrome or take any other drastic measures. A judge in a separate suit about Google's ad sales network also ruled against the company in April.

Previously: Meta Faces the Antitrust Lawsuit Mark Zuckerberg Never Wanted

Photo by Greg Bulla