When even allies of the Biden administration begin asking whether a high-profile merger challenge was the right call, it's worth paying attention.

Following Spirit Airlines' bankruptcy, former White House Domestic Policy Advisor Neera Tanden publicly questioned whether the Justice Department's decision to block the JetBlue-Spirit merger had been a mistake, writing that the outcome should prompt "an honest assessment" of whether the challenge ultimately served consumers or workers.

That conversation appears to be growing.

A recent POLITICO Magazine column argues that the Spirit episode exposed a disconnect between the Biden administration's antitrust rhetoric and real-world outcomes. After the merger was blocked, Spirit entered bankruptcy, hundreds of employees lost their jobs, fares increased, and shareholders were wiped out. As the article notes, what had been celebrated as "yet another victory" for consumers became a much more complicated story.

The declaration may have been premature.

The piece goes further, suggesting the broader effort to redefine antitrust enforcement around skepticism of mergers largely failed to produce durable legal or political victories. Instead, it argues, the incoming Trump administration is returning to a more traditional framework centered on consumer welfare and more practical merger enforcement.

For the EXIT Alliance, the lesson isn't that every merger should be approved. It is that merger policy should be grounded in evidence, not ideology. Well-functioning acquisition markets are a critical part of the innovation economy, providing founders with viable exit paths, encouraging investment in new companies, preserving businesses through ownership transitions, and creating opportunities for employees and communities alike.

The debate over the JetBlue-Spirit merger illustrates a broader point: blocking a transaction isn't automatically a victory. The relevant question is whether consumers, workers, entrepreneurs, and the broader economy are actually better off as a result. Increasingly, that's a question observers across the political spectrum are beginning to ask.