Law Commons^™

Antitrust And The 'Filed Rate' Doctrine: Deregulation And State Action, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

In its Keogh decision the Supreme Court held that although the Interstate Commerce Act did not exempt railroads from antitrust liability, a private plaintiff may not recover treble damages based on an allegedly monopolistic tariff rate filed with a federal agency. Keogh very likely grew out of Justice Brandeis's own zeal for regulation and his concern for the protection of small business — in this case, mainly shippers whom he felt were protected from discrimination by filed rates. The Supreme Court's Square D decision later conceded that Keogh may have been “unwise as a matter of policy,” but reaffirmed it …

Federal Judicial And Legislative Jurisdiction Over Entities Abroad: The Long-Arm Of U.S. Antitrust Law And Viable Solutions Beyond The Timberlane/Restatement Comity Approach, Michael G. Mckinnon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust’S State Action Doctrine And The Ordinary Powers Of Corporations, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has now agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Phoebe-Putney, which held that a state statute permitting a hospital authority to acquire hospitals implicitly authorized such acquisitions when they were anticompetitive – in this particular case very likely facilitating a merger to monopoly. Under antitrust law’s “state action” doctrine a state may in fact authorize such an acquisition, provided that it “clearly articulates” its desire to approve an action that would otherwise constitute an antitrust violation and also “actively supervises” any private conduct that might fall under the state’s regulatory scheme.

“Authorization” in the context of …

Antitrust As Regulation, Alan Devlin

San Diego Law Review

Antitrust, properly understood, plays a modest role in constraining commercial behavior. With respect to unilateral conduct, it does not prohibit monopoly or the fortuitous or quality-based acquisition of the same. It generally permits dominant companies to enjoy the fruits of their positions and does not speak to the propriety of excessive pricing. It does not impose service obligations on monopolists, nor does it generally limit their right to price discriminate amongst their consumers. It merely prohibits monopolists' artificial creation of impediments to competition--so-called exclusionary practices. With respect to concerted behavior, the law allows a vast swathe of private agreements, even …

The Diverging Approach To Price Squeezes In The United States And Europe, George A. Hay, Kathryn Mcmahon

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Notwithstanding assertions of greater harmonization and convergence between United States and European Union competition law, recent case law has identified significant differences in their approaches to the regulation of a price or margin squeeze. In the US after linkLine the likelihood of a successful claim has been significantly diminished, particularly if there has been no prior course of voluntary dealing and no downstream predatory pricing. In contrast, in a series of decisions in liberalized telecommunications markets, the EU Courts in applying an “as efficient competitor test” have focused on the preservation of competitive rivalry as “equality of opportunity.” This significantly …

Survival Of The Standard: Today’S Public Interest Requirement In Television Broadcasting And The Return To Regulation, Drew Simshaw

Federal Communications Law Journal

The notion that broadcasters must broadcast in the public interest has always been a requirement; exactly how this requirement is met has taken many forms. This Note examines the history of the public interest requirement in broadcasting-from vagueness to regulation to good faith and presumptions of compliance-and considers the appropriate direction for the public interest requirement's future. The deregulation of the 1980s served a valuable purpose at the time by lifting burdens and sparking innovation. It is time to examine those innovative methods of ascertaining the needs of our communities and providing desired programming, in order to determine ways in …

Interpreting Regulations, Kevin M. Stack

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The age of statutes has given way to an era of regulations, but our jurisprudence has fallen behind. Despite the centrality of regulations to law, courts have no intelligible approach to regulatory interpretation. The neglect of regulatory interpretation is not only a shortcoming in interpretive theory but also a practical problem for administrative law. Canonical doctrines of administrative law ” Chevron, Seminole Rock/Auer, and Accardi ” involve interpreting regulations, and yet courts lack a consistent approach. This Article develops a method for interpreting regulations and, more generally, situates regulatory interpretation within debates over legal interpretation. It argues that a purposive …

Lessons From The Flash Crash For The Regulation Of High-Frequency Traders, Edgar Ortega Barrales

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Are equity markets vulnerable to a sudden collapse if the traders who account for about half of the volume have no regulatory obligations to stabilize prices? After the “Flash Crash” of May 6, 2010, policymakers have resoundingly answered this question in the affirmative. During the worst of the crash, some of the so-called high-frequency trading firms that dominate equity markets stopped trading and prices collapsed, momentarily wiping out almost $1 trillion in market value. In response, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is considering whether high-frequency trading firms should be required to act as the traders of last resort. This …