Section VI · Power, Accountability & Democratic Renewal
Lina Khan
Antitrust, Platform Power & the Neo-Brandeisian Revival
To understand Lina Khan, you first have to understand structure — and how markets are not neutral systems, but legal and institutional constructions shaped by rules.
For much of the late 20th century, antitrust policy in the United States was guided by a relatively narrow principle: consumer welfare, often measured through price. If prices were low, markets were presumed to be functioning well, even if power was becoming concentrated.
Khan challenges that framework.
At the center of her work is a foundational claim:
Markets are not self-organizing in a purely natural sense; they are structured through law, and those structures determine how power is distributed.
In her influential work on Amazon, Khan examined how platform companies can achieve dominance not necessarily through high prices, but through control of infrastructure, data, and market access. Traditional antitrust tools, focused primarily on price effects, may fail to capture these dynamics.
Her method is structural analysis.
Rather than asking only whether consumers are paying more, Khan examines how market structures evolve — who controls key nodes, how competitors are treated, and whether new entrants can realistically emerge.
From this perspective, power is cumulative.
Digital platforms can reinforce their dominance through network effects, vertical integration, and control over data. These advantages can create feedback loops that are difficult to disrupt once established.
Her work also revives an earlier tradition.
Often associated with Justice Louis Brandeis, this approach to antitrust considers not only prices, but the broader implications of concentration — on democracy, labor, innovation, and political power.
She reframes the purpose of regulation.
Regulation is not only about correcting isolated market failures; it is about shaping the conditions under which markets operate. This includes setting boundaries on concentration and ensuring that economic power does not translate unchecked into political influence.
Supporters see Khan as revitalizing antitrust for a new economic era.
They argue that her focus on structure, platform dynamics, and long-term competition addresses gaps in existing frameworks. By expanding the scope of analysis, she provides tools to evaluate modern forms of market power.
From this perspective, Khan's contribution is to reassert that markets require active governance to remain competitive and aligned with democratic values.
Critics, however, raise concerns about the implications of this approach.
They argue that expanding antitrust beyond clear price effects may introduce uncertainty into enforcement and risk overreach. Determining when concentration becomes harmful can be complex and context-dependent.
Others question the potential impact on innovation. Large firms, critics argue, can generate efficiencies and invest at scale in ways that benefit consumers.
A deeper critique examines institutional capacity. If regulators are tasked with shaping market structure, how can they do so effectively without unintended consequences?
Lina Khan does not reject markets. She redefines how they should be understood and governed.
Her work raises enduring questions: Who designs the rules of the market? How should power be measured in the digital age? And what role should democratic institutions play in shaping economic structure?
These questions sit at the center of the relationship between capitalism, law, and democracy.