State of Texas, et al. v. BlackRock, et. al.

Published on:
March 24, 2025

Court:

U.S. District Court

(E.D. Texas)

Amicus Issue:

Whether passive investors could be in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which prohibits the acquisition of stock when “the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition,” simply because the passive investors have cross-ownership interests in competing companies.

Counsel of Record:

Morgan Lewis LLP

Jon R. Roellke

William S.D. Cravens

William T. McEnroe

Zachary M. Johns

Stephen LaBrecque

Other Amici:

None.

Details

Download

More Content

  • Letters
    Nov 09, 2026

    Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers (SIFMA AMG)

    SIFMA AMG supports the SEC’s proposal to rescind the investment adviser pay-to-play rule, citing compliance burdens, costs and restrictions on political speech.
  • Letters
    Nov 09, 2026

    Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers

    SIFMA comments on the SEC’s proposal to rescind the political contributions rule for investment advisers, citing compliance burdens and existing safeguards.
  • Amicus Briefs
    Nov 06, 2026

    Blockchain Assoc. and Crypto Council for Innovation v. IL

Get the latest trends, stats, and research on financial markets and securities.