We are witnessing a swing in the antitrust pendulum from minimalist to populist poles. This entry briefly highlights the dynamics, potential changes, and, perhaps more importantly from a counseling perspective, what will change and what will remain the same.
At the minimalist antitrust pole, markets are viewed as self-correcting, i.e., no monopolist or manipulator will
A highly respected antitrust professor wrote: “When Congress enacted the federal antitrust laws it chose not to foreclose state antimerger activity. The legislative histories of the antitrust laws indicate that the congressional purpose was to supplement, not supplant, state activity. This intention has repeatedly been affirmed by the Supreme Court. Critics fear negative effects from
The 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Trinko is generally understood to mean that an incumbent local exchange company is not obligated under the antitrust laws to open its network to a competitor.[1] In the context of recent FCC decisions, it is noteworthy that Justice Scalia’s opinion in Trinko was grounded on the fact