A bipartisan group of 21 states has asked a federal judge to permit further investigation into the US government's March settlement with Live Nation Entertainment NYSE:LYV, a live entertainment company that owns Ticketmaster. The states told US District Judge Arun Subramanian in New York that they have significant concerns about whether the agreement serves the public interest and does enough to encourage competition across the concert and events industry. Their request could increase scrutiny of a settlement that allowed Live Nation to retain Ticketmaster despite the Justice Department's earlier monopolization case against the company.
The Justice Department withdrew from the case one week into the trial after reaching a last-minute agreement with Live Nation, while more than 30 states and Washington, DC, continued pursuing the lawsuit. That coalition secured an April jury verdict finding that Live Nation had illegally monopolized the live events industry and overcharged music fans for performance tickets. Subramanian must now review the proposed settlement under the Tunney Act, which requires the government to explain why an antitrust agreement is in the public interest and allows outside parties to submit comments. The 21 states are seeking information about at least four parts of the proposed agreement and the process that produced it, which investors may view as a source of continuing legal and regulatory uncertainty for Live Nation.
Live Nation has acknowledged that Chief Executive Officer Michael Rapino met with President Donald Trump in the weeks before the settlement, although the company said the terms of the agreement were not discussed. The company also hired several people close to Trump to help resolve the case, including Kellyanne Conway, Trump's 2016 campaign manager, and Ric Grenell, a Live Nation board member and former head of the Kennedy Center. The states compared the matter with their separate challenge involving Hewlett Packard Enterprise, the company pursuing a $14 billion acquisition of wireless networking rival Juniper Networks. They allege that political influence affected that settlement after Justice Department leaders overruled subordinates, while the Justice Department and Hewlett Packard Enterprise deny those claims and a California federal judge has not yet issued a ruling.