Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
100 Years A Vagrant: Grounding The Rootless Rule Of Reason For Horizontal Antitrust Restraints Under Section 1, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
100 Years A Vagrant: Grounding The Rootless Rule Of Reason For Horizontal Antitrust Restraints Under Section 1, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
Jesse Markham
Competitive restraints challenged under Section 1 of the Sherman Act are evaluated under either the rule of reason or, for a small and diminishing group of restraints, under per se rules. The role for per se rules has diminished in recent years as courts have retreated from them out of concern that their rigid application can condemn desirable competitive conduct. Now, the rule of reason is the default mode of analysis applicable to nearly all categories of alleged competitive restraints. During the same period in which the Supreme Court expanded the reach of the rule of reason, it also rendered …
Sailing A Sea Of Doubt: A Critique Of The Rule Of Reason In U.S. Antitrust Law, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
Sailing A Sea Of Doubt: A Critique Of The Rule Of Reason In U.S. Antitrust Law, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
Jesse Markham
The purpose of the article is to offer a critique of the rule of reason, tracing its disintegration from its original articulation 100 years ago in Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 60 (1911). The article then describes a construct for restoring transparency and content to the rule of reason. The rule of reason is the default standard for assessing restraints under the Sherman Act. The role for the rule of reason has expanded in recent years as the Supreme Court has reversed a number of per se rules, thus relegating additional categories of restraints to the …