Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Antitrust Regulation And The Federal-State Balance: Restoring The Original Design, Alan J. Meese Oct 2020

Antitrust Regulation And The Federal-State Balance: Restoring The Original Design, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The U.S. Constitution divides authority over commerce between states and the national government. Passed in 1890, the Sherman Act (“the Act”) reflects this allocation of power, reaching only those harmful agreements that are “in restraint of... commerce among the several States.” This Article contends that the Supreme Court erred when it radically altered the balance between state and national power over trade restraints in 1948, abruptly abandoning decades of precedent recognizing exclusive state authority over most intrastate restraints. This revised construction of the Act contravened the statute’s apparent meaning, unduly expanded the reach of federal antitrust regulation, and undermined the …


Joint Response To The House Judiciary Committee On The State Of Antitrust Law And Implications For Protecting Competition In Digital Markets, Jonathan Baker, Joseph Farrell, Andrew Gavil, Martin Gaynor, Michael Kades, Michael Katz, Gene Kimmelman, A. Melamed, Nancy Rose, Steven Salop, Fiona Scott Morton, Carl Shapiro Apr 2020

Joint Response To The House Judiciary Committee On The State Of Antitrust Law And Implications For Protecting Competition In Digital Markets, Jonathan Baker, Joseph Farrell, Andrew Gavil, Martin Gaynor, Michael Kades, Michael Katz, Gene Kimmelman, A. Melamed, Nancy Rose, Steven Salop, Fiona Scott Morton, Carl Shapiro

Congressional and Other Testimony

Economic research establishes that market power is now a serious problem. Growing market power harms consumers and workers, slows innovation, and limits productivity growth. Market power is on the rise in a number of major industries, including, for example, airlines, brewing, and hospitals, where multiple horizontal mergers that were allowed to proceed without antitrust challenge have markedly increased concentration in important markets and facilitated the exercise of market power. Exclusionary conduct by dominant companies that stifles competition from actual and potential rivals — including nascent rivals with capabilities for challenging a dominant firm’s market power and firms with competing R&D …


Vertical Merger Enforcement Actions: 1994–April 2020, Steven C. Salop, Daniel P. Culley Apr 2020

Vertical Merger Enforcement Actions: 1994–April 2020, Steven C. Salop, Daniel P. Culley

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

We have revised our earlier listing of vertical merger enforcement actions by the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission since 1994. This revised listing includes 66 vertical matters beginning in 1994 through April 2020. It includes challenges and certain proposed transactions that were abandoned in the face of Agency concerns. This listing can be treated as an Appendix to Steven C. Salop and Daniel P. Culley, Revising the Vertical Merger Guidelines: Policy Issues and an Interim Guide for Practitioners, 4 JOURNAL OF ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT 1 (2016).


The Inefficiency Of Quasi-Per Se Rules: Regulating Information Exchange In Eu And U.S. Antitrust Law, Kenneth Khoo, Jerrold Tsin Howe Soh Mar 2020

The Inefficiency Of Quasi-Per Se Rules: Regulating Information Exchange In Eu And U.S. Antitrust Law, Kenneth Khoo, Jerrold Tsin Howe Soh

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

It is well understood that the exchange of information between horizontal competitors can violate competition law provisions in both the European Union (EU) and the United States, namely, article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and section 1 of the Sherman Act. However, despite ostensible similarities between EU and U.S. antitrust law concerning interfirm information exchange, substantial differences remain. In this article, we make a normative argument for the U.S. antitrust regime's approach, on the basis that the United States’ approach to information exchange is likely to be more efficient than the relevant approach under …