Reject the Department of Justice Settlement for Egg Industry Price Gauging

October 16, 2026

Zachary Trotter

Chief, Chicago Office, Antitrust Division

Department of Justice

209 South La Salle St. Suite 600

Chicago, IL 60604

Re: Public Comment on Proposed Final Judgments in United States et al. v. Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. et al.

 

Dear Chief Trotter,

We are writing to oppose the proposed final settlement agreements in United States et al. v. Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. et al. and to urge the court to reject the proposed deal.

The U.S. government complaint in this case alleged, in great detail, an extensive anti-competitive conspiracy that drove up the price of eggs – a staple of the American diet – for consumers across the country. The complaint alleges the defendant companies engaged in coordinated and intentional manipulation of bidding processes on commodity markets in a manner that drove up prices for consumers. Memorably, one executive wrote to others, ““[a]s a group we need to bid like they vote in Chicago, early and often.” The complaint persuasively alleges, “from June 2022 through March 2025, Defendants and their co-conspirators entered into and engaged in an agreement and conspiracy that had the direct, substantial, and foreseeable effect of artificially inflating Urner Barry’s egg price quotations.”

The proposed settlements fail to adequately remedy the alleged harm to competition or to provide sufficient safeguards against future anticompetitive conduct. The defendants do not admit wrongdoing. They agree not to share bidding information in ways that would enable future unlawful coordination, commitments that go little beyond existing law. The settlement requires the defendants to make very modest payments – which the companies deny are fines or penalties – and to donate 53 million eggs to food banks and nonprofits. No evidence is provided that these tiny payments and donations would disgorge the defendants’ alleged unjust gains, let alone deter future misconduct. Defendant Cal-Maine’s estimated combined economic obligation under the settlement is approximately $2.775 million—about 0.23% of the $1.22 billion in profit the company reported in fiscal year 2025. No penalties are imposed on the executives that the complaint alleges drove the conspiracy.

The serious allegations in the Department of Justice’s initial complaint demand real accountability and serious remedies. The proposed settlements fail on those scores. They do not protect competition or deter recurrence. They fail to serve the public interest and should be rejected.

Signed,

Public Citizen

Consumer Federation of America

Farm Action

Food & Water Watch

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

Affordable Homeownership Foundation Inc.

DemCast USA

Essential Information

Green State Solutions

Indivisible Chicago

Indivisible Marin

MIRA/ Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance

NELE Alliance for Democracy

People Power United

Secure Elections Network

The Workers Circle

Utopian Visions

Virginia Citizens Consumer Council