Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Young Again, Larry Yackle
Young Again, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
This essay revisits an old problem in the law of federal courts: the source of the right of action in Ex parte Young. The core of the story underlying Young is familiar. Shareholders in railroad corporations filed suit in a federal circuit court, claiming that state established rail rates in Minnesota violated the Fourteenth Amendment and the (dormant) Commerce Clause. The circuit court issued a preliminary injunction barring adoption of the rates and prohibiting the defendants from attempting to enforce them. One of the defendants, Minnesota Attorney General Edward T. Young, nonetheless brought a state court mandamus action against the …
A Brief History Of American Telecommunications Regulation, Tim Wu
A Brief History Of American Telecommunications Regulation, Tim Wu
Faculty Scholarship
While the history of governmental regulation of communication is at least as long as the history of censorship, the modern regulation of long-distance, or "tele," communications is relatively short and can be dated to the rise of the telegraph in the mid-19th century. The United States left the telegraph in private hands, unlike countries and as opposed to the U.S. postal system, and has done the same with most of the significant telecommunications facilities that have been developed since. The decision to allow private ownership of telecommunications infrastructure has led to a rather particularized regulation of these private owners of …
Market Power Requirement In Antitrust Rule Of Reason Cases: A Rhetorical History, The, Mark R. Patterson
Market Power Requirement In Antitrust Rule Of Reason Cases: A Rhetorical History, The, Mark R. Patterson
Faculty Scholarship
The requirement that an antitrust plaintiff show market power in rule of reason cases has an uninspiring history and unconvincing justifications. Such a requirement has never been adopted by the Supreme Court, and is currently imposed by only the Seventh and Fourth Circuits. Indeed, the requirement was never imposed very widely, despite frequent claims to the contrary. More significantly, the Seventh Circuit cases that initially established the requirement, and that continue to be cited for it, did so with misleading citations to cases from other circuits. Furthermore, the justifications that have been offered for the requirement have generally been either …