The Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in an antitrust case alleging that drug manufacturer Johnson & Johnson illegally maintained a monopoly through anticompetitive conduct. The FTC's brief seeks to protect American consumers from anticompetitive harm by asserting that longstanding Supreme Court precedent has clearly and consistently held that antitrust law is focused on the impact of anticompetitive conduct, not on the intent to harm competition.

CareFirst of Maryland Inc. brought a class action alleging that Johnson & Johnson willfully maintained its monopoly power in the market for Stelara (ustekinumab)-a drug used to treat several autoimmune conditions, including psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease-through the acquisition of Momenta Pharmaceuticals and subsequent assertion of its patent portfolio to delay or prevent competition.

The FTC's amicus brief argues that binding precedent focuses on the effect on competition and harm to consumers, not on proof of specific intent to harm competition. Requiring a plaintiff to show that an alleged monopolist specifically intended for conduct to have anticompetitive consequences would impede vigorous antitrust enforcement, undermine competition and harm American consumers, the FTC's brief states.

The Commission filed the amicus brief given its strong interest in ensuring the proper application of federal antitrust laws.

Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the Federal Trade Commission is focused on making prescription drugs more affordable for Americans by promoting competition.

The Commission vote authorizing the issuance of the amicus brief was 2-0.