GMU Antonin Scalia Law School (Arlington)

Tad Lipsky

GMU Antonin Scalia Law School (Arlington)
Adjunct Professor

Mr. Lipsky is Adjunct Professor at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, Arlington. He was a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Latham & Watkins. He retired from Partnership on February 28, 2017. A member of the firm since 2002, Mr. Lipsky is internationally recognized for his work on both US and non-US antitrust and competition law and policy, and has handled antitrust matters throughout the world. Having served as chief antitrust lawyer for The Coca-Cola Company from 1992-2002, Mr. Lipsky has incomparable experience with antitrust in the US, EU, Canada, Japan and other established antitrust-law regimes, as well as in new and emerging antitrust-law regimes in scores of jurisdictions that adopted free-market policies following the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. From 1981-83 Mr. Lipsky served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General under William F. Baxter, who sparked profound antitrust law changes while serving as President Reagan’s chief antitrust official. In that position Mr. Lipsky supervised Supreme Court litigation in a series of groundbreaking antitrust cases. He supervised preparation of the Department of Justice "Merger Guidelines". He also organized and supervised the Antitrust Division’s review of United States v. IBM Corp., which culminated in a joint stipulation of dismissal without prejudice of the marathon case in 1982. Mr. Lipsky served as the first International Officer of the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law from 2001-03. He served on the Editorial Board of Competition Laws Outside the United States (2001). He has held a variety of senior positions among the officers and governing council of the Section of Antitrust Law and continues to serve as a Co-chair of the Section’s International Task Force. He is admitted to practice before the US Supreme Court and various federal appellate courts. Mr. Lipsky has been acknowledged for distinguishing himself in his legal practice. Throughout his career, he was consistently recognized by Chambers USA, The Legal 500 US, Super Lawyers and The Best Lawyers in America. He is also listed as a top competition lawyer in the Who’s Who Legal: Competition 2014, 2015 and 2016 guide. Mr. Lipsky received a J.D. degree from Stanford Law School.


Linked authors

GMU Antonin Scalia Law School (Arlington)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Washington DC)
George Mason University (Fairfax)
George Mason University (Fairfax)
George Mason University (Fairfax)


12140 Review

Alden F. Abbott, Robin Adelstein, Megan Browdie, Michael A. Carrier, Peter C. Carstensen, Samuel Clark, Lisl J. Dunlop, Harry First, Albert A. Foer, Eleanor M. Fox, Jacqueline Grise, Ryan Kantor, Donald C. Klawiter, John Kwoka, James Langenfeld, Tad Lipsky, Alessandro Massolo, Howard Morse, Gabriella Muscolo, James Bo Pearl, Noah Pinegar, Chris Ring, Christopher Sagers, Richard S. Taffet, Willard K. Tom, Eliot Turner, Doug Tween, Tommaso Valletti, Michael L. Weiner The new US antitrust administration


This Concurrences special set of articles focuses on antitrust law and enforcement in the aftermath of the American Presidential Elections. It questions the changes and challenges expected in 2021 under the new Biden administration, and its impacts with respect to antitrust legislation and (...)

Andreas Bardong, Céline Gauer, David Bosco, Etienne Pfister, Katrin Schallenberg, Oliver Bretz, Simon Genevaz, Tad Lipsky Market tests in antitrust and merger control proceedings


Nowadays, commitments decisions of the competition authorities are, most of the time, preceded by a consultation of third parties. These "market tests" have become a central step of the antitrust procedure and merger control. The authors of this Tendances present their experience in using this (...)

Tad Lipsky Is soft convergence enough?


As competition rules spread globally, «soft convergence» became the key strategy to reduce conflicts. While its achievements are laudable, the strategy has evident limits. For example, the questionable accuracy of the procedures by which harsh remedies are applied is an area of concern where (...)


Send a message