Leiv Blad, Bryan Killian, Jan 27, 2010
Overturning a 96-year-old rule, the United States Supreme Court held in Leegin that minimum resale price maintenance (“RPM”) agreements would no longer be considered illegal per se under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, but instead would be evaluated under the more lenient “rule of reason.” A number of states immediately objected to the change, vowing to legislatively reverse Leegin. Maryland has already done so and other states may follow.
This flurry of legislative activity raises the question: Can a state overturn Leegin consistent with the United States Constitution? The answer to that question is no, at least to the extent the state regulates conduct that is wholly outside its borders.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Washington State Considers Ban on Rent Pricing Software Amid Federal Lawsuit
Mar 27, 2025 by
CPI
TikTok Shop Expands to France, Germany, and Italy Despite Uncertainty in the US Market
Mar 27, 2025 by
CPI
Tech Groups Urge SCOTUS to Reject ‘Monopoly Broth’ Theory in Antitrust Case Against Duke Energy
Mar 27, 2025 by
CPI
WhatsApp Secures EU Court Adviser’s Backing in Privacy Fine Dispute
Mar 27, 2025 by
CPI
UK Competition Regulator Flags Concerns Over SLB’s $8 Billion ChampionX Deal
Mar 27, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Mobile Ecosystems
Mar 24, 2025 by
CPI
Mobile Ecosystems: An Intellectual Entelechy but A Necessary Model
Mar 24, 2025 by
Alba Ribera Martinez
Creating Contestability and Fairness in Mobile Ecosystems: The Contribution of the DMA
Mar 24, 2025 by
Damien Geradin & Daniel Mandrescu
Digital Ecosystems and the Not (Yet) As Efficient Competitor Principle
Mar 24, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Assessing the Competition Law Scrutiny of Smart Wearables and Mobile AR/VR Devices
Mar 24, 2025 by
Kayvan Hazemi-Jebelli