Once again, the federal government has decided what’s best for you—once again, not asking you. In this case, it’s the Justice Department which wants to put itself between you and your smartphone. Recently, the Justice Department lawyers have decided that Apple’s approach to data security, privacy, and application or app integrity isn’t done for the purpose of protecting you as a consumer, but rather is being done to allow Apple to maintain a monopoly in the United States cell phone market.

In a recent lawsuit filed by the federal government lawyers, the Justice Department claims Apple’s 58% market share is a monopoly and that Apple is engaging in anti-competitive activities to maintain the monopoly.

In an effort to garner support for its lawsuit, the Justice Department lawyers are asking state Attorneys General to sign onto their case. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, himself an expert in antitrust law, has not done so — at least not yet. Attorney General Weiser has a rare opportunity to stand up against the federal government and to avoid joining the misguided Justice Department lawsuit. By saying no to joining the federal government vexatious court case, Attorney General Weiser would prioritize and protect Colorado’s $52.6 billion tech industry and the 248,000 people it employs in our state.

To be clear, sometimes antitrust cases are necessary when a company actually does have a monopoly. When they do, fair competition and consumers need to be protected from the monopolist’s unfair and even predatory conduct. With his tremendous knowledge and experience, Attorney General Weiser has been a leading advocate for consumer protection in the antitrust arena, while ensuring that consumers receive the benefit of healthy competition in the marketplace.

Unfortunately, though, the Justice Department’s latest foray into the technology marketplace will do nothing to enhance consumer protections in Colorado. In fact, if successful, it may have the opposite effect.

Simply put, the lawsuit against Apple is built on shaky ground, trying to address problems that do not exist in Colorado. That would be bad enough by itself, but the lawsuit also has the potential to endanger consumers’ data security and privacy.

The federal government is accusing Apple of intentionally impeding consumers’ ability to switch from their devices to other smartphones – which simply is not true. What is true is that Apple has high privacy and security standards for developers and technology that can be downloaded on the iPhone – which makes the iPhone safer, a signature reason that consumers love their products.

Another unfounded concern from the Department of Justice lawyers is Apple’s approach to emerging “super-apps,” which by design are intended to be a gateway to a wide range of services well beyond the confines of the App Store. Contrary to Justice’s assumptions,

Apple’s app guidelines are the same across the world, including countries where super-apps are popular, such as Japan. In the case of Japan, Apple’s app policy hasn’t led to a monopoly at all. In fact, Apple only makes up roughly 50% of the smartphone market share in Japan. One can speculate that the reason why super-apps haven’t taken off here in the U.S. like they have elsewhere in the world is because of the serious data privacy concerns and the relinquishment of more personal and private data to the popular social media apps – not because Apple is restricting access, the way the government claims. Consistently, Apple’s top priority has been and always will be the safety and security of app and device users, whatever or however the consumer wishes to use them.

In order to build public support, it’s clear that the Department of Justice is trying to sell this case against Apple like their landmark lawsuit against Microsoft in 1998. But the crucial difference is there actually was a legitimate case against Microsoft at that time. Microsoft was actively and intentionally refusing to platform competitors and cutting them off from customers for market advantage. The difference is simple – Microsoft’s motivation was to control consumers and competitors. Apple’s motivation is to ensure consumer privacy and developer safety.

Hopefully, Attorney General Weiser recognizes that staying out of the federal lawsuit is the correct decision. A vibrant tech industry is vital to Colorado. With tech hubs popping up all over the state, tech is a driving force for innovation and prosperity, enticing the best and brightest employees from across the country to move to our beautiful state.

When Attorney General Weiser thoroughly examines the Justice Department’s claims, one hopes he sees that this misguided case will damage Colorado’s technology industry. Aligning with the federal government’s efforts to constrain privacy-focused innovators like Apple to the benefit of other “personal data-hungry” companies, Colorado risks undermining our technology sector and stifling innovation.

The federal government should be focusing on actual antitrust issues that risk consumer protections and safety, not cases designed to punish large corporations from being too successful. I hope Attorney General Weiser agrees.

Bob Gardner, a Colorado State Senator, representing Senate District 12.