Relative to antitrust law enforcement.
Summary
This measure would commend the United States House of Representatives' Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law on its decision to investigate antitrust issues. The measure would also urge the Federal Trade Commission, the United States Department of Justice, and the Congress of the United States to revisit federal antitrust law so that price increases are not the primary criterion used to determine whether or not a potentially monopolistic act harms consumers. The measure would respectfully request the California Attorney General to monitor closely the work of both the aforementioned subcommittee and federal law enforcement, use best efforts to obtain evidence gathered by them, and provide the Legislature and the Governor with evidence that may have become available before January 1, 2020, and to also work closely with other state attorneys general to determine legal actions the State of California and other states may take to curb the monopolistic powers of giant technology companies.
Bill status
introduced
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Sep 2019
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Sep 4, 2019
Last action Sep 5, 2019
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
2
Key actions
0
Committee
0
Sep 4, 2019
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 3 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Jordan Cunningham
RRepublican
Co
Chad Mayes
IIndependent
Co
James Gallagher
RRepublican
Co
Tom Lackey
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AJR 24
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AJR 24. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline