Kamala Harris’ campaign’s close ties to Big Tech have raised concerns that Google will be allowed to back away from a plan to break up its search empire if she is elected president, the Post has learned.
Harris is close to Paul Weiss, the law firm that is defending Google in another major antitrust case targeting its digital advertising business. Karen Dunn, the firm’s lead attorney, is helping Harris prepare for the debate. Similarly, the firm’s president, Brad Karp, is reportedly leading a “Kamala Harris Lawyers Committee” to raise money for her White House bid.
The former U.S. senator from California is also counting heavily on Eric Holder, who led the selection of her potential vice presidential nominees, and his brother-in-law Tony West, a Silicon Valley ally who left his job as Uber’s chief legal officer to help her campaign. Both are reportedly on the shortlist of potential Cabinet positions in a Harris administration.
“It’s obviously dramatic in terms of image,” said Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project. “It will be a turning point for the Harris administration, which could become evident even before she’s inaugurated if we see whether or not these figures are nominated for key positions in the White House or the Justice Department.”
The Justice Department is likely to push to break up Google after Judge Amit Mehta ruled that the company had an illegal monopoly on online search. Although Mehta will consider possible remedies starting September 6, the dispute will last well beyond the next president’s first term.
The risk of a victory for Harris — who as president would have the power to appoint antitrust enforcers at the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission — is that tech-friendly advisers could lobby behind the scenes for leniency toward Google, concerned experts told The Post.
“They could rely on [deputy attorney general] “Lisa Monaco is going to settle her score,” one well-connected tech policy expert told the Post. “Say, ‘OK, we’ve proven our point, go get Google’s best offer, make sure it has three commas and let’s shut it down.’ And nothing changes.”
In 2010, as attorney general in the tech-friendly Obama administration, Holder blocked Christine Varney, then the Justice Department’s antitrust chief, from launching an investigation into Google for search monopoly, a source familiar with the department said. Instead, the FTC investigated and did not file charges.
A spokesperson for Harris’ campaign declined to comment. Representatives for Paul Weiss, Eric Holder and the Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Donald Trump — whose Justice Department first launched an antitrust case targeting Google search in 2020 — is much more likely to demand a significant crackdown on the company, according to Bill Kovacic, the Republican-appointed FTC chairman from 2008 to 2009.
“I feel like Trump distrusts and hates the tech industry more than she does,” Kovacic said. “Trump thinks all the tech executives stopped him from winning in 2020. He may want to punish them by forcing a breakup.”
In recent interviews, Trump has called Google “illegitimate,” said the company “needs to be careful” and claimed to have “a feeling that Google is going to be close to being shut down.”
Makan Delrahim, the Justice Department’s antitrust chief during the Trump administration, intended from the start to pursue breaking up Google, the source close to the department said.
Harris has yet to clearly define her views on cracking down on tech monopolies. In a speech Friday detailing her economic agenda, Harris outlined controversial plans to lower food and housing prices but did not say whether she planned to crack down on the monopolies of big tech companies.
She has received donations from Google in the past and reportedly presented herself as an ally of the tech industry during a 2010 meeting with company employees.
Advisers who oppose a broad anti-monopoly campaign would not necessarily need Cabinet positions to exert behind-the-scenes influence on antitrust issues, experts said.
A longtime Democrat, Dunn was once considered a candidate to lead the Justice Department’s antitrust division — a role that later went to the department’s current head, Jonathan Kanter. She also helped Attorney General Merrick Garland prepare for his 2021 Senate confirmation hearing.
In addition to his work for Google, Dunn has represented Apple and Uber in major legal battles.
“Karen Dunn is being paid extravagantly by Google to get out of trouble — ideally through a settlement — so it’s concerning that she has so much access to Vice President Harris, Garland, Monaco and their teams,” said a Capitol Hill veteran who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter.
Paul Weiss staffers have contributed a whopping $1.46 million to Democrats this cycle — more than any other law firm, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets. The firm also employs several former members of the Biden-Harris Justice Department.
Still, a potential Harris administration would be limited in its ability to influence the Justice Department’s Google briefings, even if it were inclined to take a friendlier approach to Big Tech.
Hauser said any attempt to interfere in Justice Department affairs could provoke a strong public backlash from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
This was demonstrated earlier this year when Democratic mega-donor Reid Hoffman sparked outrage by publicly calling on Harris to fire FTC Chairwoman Lina Khan if elected.
“I can’t imagine a Harris administration having both the will and the courage to do a ‘Saturday Night Massacre’ on the antitrust division,” Hauser said. “It would be, ‘Aha, big donors are forcing you to do this.’ It would be a catastrophic scandal for a new administration.”
Google has already vowed to appeal the federal judge’s ruling in the search engine case, meaning any penalties that result from the search engine lawsuit likely won’t be enforced for years.
Mehta said Google’s practice of paying billions of dollars to partners like Apple to ensure its search engine is enabled by default on most smartphones had stifled competition.
Justice Department lawyers could push Mehta to order Google to sell parts of its business, such as its Android operating system, Chrome web browser and AdWords advertising platform, Bloomberg reported. Other options include ending Google’s default agreements or requiring it to share data with rival search engines.
The DOJ’s separate antitrust case targeting Google’s alleged monopoly on digital advertising technology is also set to go to trial in September — and another loss could also upend the company’s business model.
