Government oversight and state-level litigation intensified across technology, healthcare, and financial sectors. US regulators joined X's legal challenge in Europe, Florida targeted insulin price collusion, and New York sued Polymarket. Additionally, the Sixth Circuit subjected Kalshi's contracts to state gambling laws, while a federal court dismissed Michigan's antitrust suit against major oil producers.
01Policy
US Government Seeks to Join Elon Musk's Challenge Against EU Fine on X
The US Department of Justice filed an application with the EU General Court to intervene in Elon Musk's legal challenge against a 120 million euro ($136.51 million) fine levied on X by the European Commission. Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate stated that the commission inappropriately attempted to expand its regulatory authority outside its jurisdiction to reach American companies. The European Commission issued the penalty in December 2025 over the platform's paid blue tick verification system, ad transparency, and data access for researchers. The fine marks the commission's first official non-compliance decision under the Digital Services Act. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized the penalty as an attack on American technology platforms. The European Commission denied targeting specific nationalities, asserting its role in protecting digital standards.
Michigan Judge Dismisses State's Antitrust Lawsuit Against Major Oil Companies
A federal court dismissed Michigan's lawsuit against four major oil companies and their primary trade association on September 22. U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering ruled that the state lacked antitrust standing to sue under federal law because the link between the alleged 1979 conspiracy and current energy prices was too remote. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel had filed the 126-page action in January, alleging that BP, Chevron, Exxon, Shell, and the American Petroleum Institute coordinated to suppress , electric vehicles, and charging infrastructure to protect fossil fuels. The state argued this collusion left consumers paying artificially high prices for household energy and transport. Judge Beckering found that while energy overcharges represented a plausible antitrust injury, the causal chain spanning nearly five decades was too attenuated to prove proximate cause. The court also held that effects such as climate-related damage, higher property insurance premiums, and public mitigation spending fell outside the scope of antitrust law. The Sherman Act claim was dismissed with prejudice, while a separate claim under the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act was dismissed without prejudice, leaving the state free to refile it in a Michigan state court.
Kevin Warsh Pushes Ahead With Fed Reforms Amid Internal Resistance
Chairman Kevin Warsh is pushing through changes to 127 days into his tenure, navigating internal resistance and economic constraints. CNBC.com reports that Warsh has altered Fed communications, including shortening post-meeting news conferences and changing reporter seating arrangements. Task forces appointed by Warsh are examining Fed practices and are scheduled to report back early next year. Last week brought a unanimous quarter-point increase, the first since 2023. runs at 3.7% according to the personal consumption expenditures indicator for July, remaining above the 's 2% target for over 5½ years. Warsh dismissed the traditional concept of a neutral funds rate during his Sept. 16 news conference. He relies instead on a broad array of market indicators to gauge financial conditions. The Bloomberg is up more than 30% this year, while diesel prices have risen 83%.
Paramount Accelerates California Settlement Talks Near Warner Bros. Merger
Paramount agreed to settle an lawsuit brought by 12 state attorneys general, clearing the final major legal hurdle for its $111 billion of Warner Bros. Discovery. California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the agreement on Monday, removing a trial that had been scheduled for a future date. The settlement averts the prospect of Paramount moving operations out of California, a threat CEO David Ellison raised during negotiations that drew concern from Governor Gavin Newsom over potential job losses. Under the five-year consent decree, Paramount must invest $1.5 billion in domestic film production above its 2025 baseline, averaging $300 million annually. The combined company must release at least 30 theatrical films a year for the first two years and 32 annually for the following three years, while maintaining its Los Angeles studio lots. Failing to meet the production quota triggers a $30 million per film penalty and puts Paramount's stake in Miramax in play. The agreement also establishes a five-member independent board to oversee editorial standards at CNN and CBS News, a workforce training fund for laid-off employees, and separate basic-cable negotiations for five years. Paramount expects the transaction to close in about two weeks.
State of Florida Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Eli Lilly, Sanofi, and CVS
The State of Florida filed an lawsuit against Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi on September 22, 2026, alleging that the major drug manufacturers colluded with pharmacy benefit managers to inflate diabetes medication prices. The complaint, lodged in Florida's 11th Judicial Circuit in Miami-Dade County by Attorney General James Uthmeier, also names CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx, alongside rebate aggregators Zinc, Ascent, and Emisar, and UnitedHealthcare Insurance. The defendant manufacturers supply more than 90% of the world's insulin, while the targeted pharmacy benefit managers process about 80% of U.S. prescriptions. According to the state's filing, drugmakers deliberately drove up published list prices for insulin and medications like Ozempic, Trulicity, Victoza, and Soliqua, subsequently returning substantial rebates to the benefit managers to secure preferred formulary placement. Uthmeier cited previous executive testimony revealing that Eli Lilly returns roughly $210, or about 75%, of a $280 vial of Humalog to benefit managers and aggregators. Uninsured patients, those meeting deductibles, and consumers on percentage-based coinsurance absorb these elevated sticker prices rather than the negotiated net prices, leaving approximately 2.3 million Florida adults with diabetes vulnerable to heavy financial strain. The lawsuit brings two counts under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and one count under the Florida Antitrust Act, seeking permanent injunctions, civil penalties, and damages.
New York State Sues Prediction Market Platform Polymarket Over Gambling Laws
New York State sued prediction market provider Polymarket on Thursday, alleging the platform is operating an unlicensed gambling business. Attorney General Letitia James and Governor Kathy Hochul filed the lawsuit against QCX LLC, doing business as Polymarket US, asking a court to halt operations and seek restitution, forfeiture of illegal gains, and penalties equal to three times those gains alongside $100,000 for each attempt or offer of sports wagering. Polymarket launched its U.S. platform in December 2025, offering contracts on sporting events to users between the ages of 18 and 20, while New York law requires users to be at least 21 for mobile sports betting. The state argues the event contracts constitute illegal gambling that bypasses taxes funding public schools and problem gambling programs. The lawsuit follows similar state actions against rival prediction platforms including Kalshi, which New York sued in July while seeking up to $36 billion in penalties. Prediction markets argue their products are financial under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Trading Commission, setting up an ongoing conflict between state gambling regulators and federal oversight. Polymarket chief legal officer Neal Kumar said the company intends to fight the lawsuit.
US Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Hear Kalshi Event Trading Case
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that prediction market provider Kalshi cannot treat its sports-related event contracts as federally regulated swaps. The unanimous decision from the three-judge panel means Ohio and Tennessee can apply their state gambling laws to the platform. Kalshi argued that its contracts fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Trading Commission, but the court found that the products do not depend on events associated with a potential financial, economic, or commercial consequence within the meaning of the statute. The ruling overturns a Tennessee federal district court decision that sided with Kalshi while reaffirming an Ohio federal district court ruling that favored state regulators. This appellate defeat follows a similar ruling last month from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding Nevada. Meanwhile, the Third Circuit Court previously ruled that the CFTC holds exclusive jurisdiction over swaps, prompting an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court that is also backed by an amicus brief from the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States. Kalshi has until November 9 to file its brief in response to the Supreme Court petition.
Regulators and state officials are aggressively targeting corporate pricing and market structures across multiple industries. Whether prediction markets can survive state gambling oversight and how Fed leadership adapts to inflation will drive immediate policy risks.
This, every morning.
SuMarket writes Government and Policy Sector every morning, along with every other section of the market and the companies and topics you follow. Free to read.