A PYMNTS Company

Tech Groups Urge SCOTUS to Reject ‘Monopoly Broth’ Theory in Antitrust Case Against Duke Energy

By  |  March 27, 2025

The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), along with several other prominent tech organizations, has filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up an important antitrust case involving Duke Energy. The brief criticizes the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision, which the tech groups argue introduces legal uncertainty that could deter future technological investment.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    According to a statement from the CCIA, the Fourth Circuit’s ruling threatens to undermine established antitrust principles by suggesting that a combination of several lawful business practices could, under certain circumstances, violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.

    The brief describes this as the “monopoly broth” theory, arguing that it creates an unjustified legal risk for businesses engaged in entirely lawful activities.

    The amicus brief asserts that the Fourth Circuit’s decision contradicts long-standing Supreme Court precedent. It warns that allowing such a theory to stand would open the door to potential treble damages for antitrust violations, even when the actions in question do not constitute illegal behavior. This, the groups argue, could stifle procompetitive conduct and undermine the very objectives of antitrust law.

    Stephanie Joyce, Senior Vice President and Chief of Staff, who is also the Director of CCIA’s Litigation Center, expressed concern over the impact of the lower court’s decision. “It is crucial that the Supreme Court review the lower court’s erroneous ‘monopoly broth’ theory of antitrust liability,” Joyce said in a statement. “In antitrust, as in math, zero plus zero is still zero – a lawful course of conduct should not be the basis for allegations of anticompetitive behavior. Allowing such claims to proceed creates legal uncertainty, harms both businesses and consumers, and runs afoul of Supreme Court precedent.”

    Source: CCIA