Democrats preview how they’d go after the Ticketmaster settlement if they regain power

A handful of Democrats called an unofficial hearing on Capitol Hill Monday to slam the Department of Justice’s “trivial” and “pathetic” settlement with Live Nation-Ticketmaster, previewing how they might go after Trump administration antitrust deals if they win back congressional power in November.

While the DOJ settlement with Live Nation, which came one week into trial and with a promise of up to $280 million, received copious pushback, Democrats don’t at the moment have the power in either chamber to set committee agendas. That meant that Monday’s so-called shadow hearing looked different than most official proceedings. Instead of sitting at the elevated seats behind the dais, the lawmakers sat at tables below, eye level with witnesses including California Attorney General Rob Bonta, one of the AGs continuing the fight against Live Nation-Ticketmaster, ousted Trump administration antitrust official Roger Alford, and several entertainment industry players, including a member of the band The Hold Steady. Several artists asked to appear at the forum declined out of fear for their livelihoods, according to House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who co-hosted the forum with Senate Homeland Security permanent subcommittee on investigations Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).

While their statements won’t be formally entered into the congressional record, the forum gave Democrats a way to publicize their concerns, which included that the DOJ’s deal was the result of undue corporate influence. “This isn’t like some kind of pickup game,” Raskin told reporters. “The corruption permeates the administration so much that we have to start building the record because it’s such an overwhelming task. We will be using the products of all of these shadow hearings to figure out where to go.” As a signal of the significance of the forum, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) delivered opening remarks to kick it off.

The lawmakers pointed to the states’ resounding victory in the jury verdict as evidence that the DOJ’s settlement fell far short of what a good faith deal would include, charging it was a result of corruption. On the 11-page verdict form, jurors checked “yes” on every question about whether the states proved their claims. The DOJ has stood by its deal as a win for consumers. The deal will still need to undergo a Tunney Act review, which is meant to ensure that it’s in the public interest.

Judges are typically loath to reject a settlement, which is why Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) has proposed legislation to strengthen the standard. But Alford, who was fired from the DOJ and later spoke out about opposing lobbyist influence in antitrust deals, said this could be the rare case where the judge may reject the DOJ’s agreement, given that the same judge is now tasked with coming up with appropriate remedies to resolve Live Nation’s monopoly, potentially including a breakup.

Bonta said the states’ breakup request, expected to be formally submitted this week, may go beyond a separation of Live Nation and Ticketmaster. They’re also considering asking for at least partial divestitures of parts of Live Nation’s venue or artist management businesses. “Divestiture, it’s the nuclear option. We believe it’s warranted, but we want to be thoughtful how we ask this judge for an appropriate remedy,” he told reporters.

“Opinions shared yesterday misrepresent how the live events industry operates,” Live Nation’s executive vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs, Dan Wall, said in a statement. “Secondary ticketing and high-demand onsales are industry-wide challenges that exist across every promoter, venue, and ticketing platform. That’s precisely why Live Nation and Ticketmaster have long supported industry-wide resale reform, including price caps and stronger consumer protections, while continuing to invest in tools that help artists manage demand and protect fans.”

Live Nation has promised to appeal the jury verdict, and even before it does it’s possible the judge will deny the states the full extent of the remedies they ask for. But Monday’s forum showed that even if that happens, Democrats will likely remain fixated on how the deal came together in the first place.