It doesn't. But if B is less of a monopoly than A, and the regulators are going to break up B, but not break up A, that does lead to questions. Why start with B? Why not start with A, and then do B?
Because that creates a lot of additional work and controversy for no real gain. Do courts rank cases and hear them in the order of severity of the crime? It's exactly the same situation. I agree that both companies should be held to the same standard, but I don't think I really care about the particular order