This article examines some of the ways in which the states have contributed to important developments in the antitrust laws, both historically and in the present. Although they are resource constrained, the states have made a significant impact on the overall direction of the antitrust laws, by bringing a consumer-centric analysis to anticompetitive conduct and legislation. While the states often work cooperatively with the federal enforcers, there are many examples throughout history, and recently, where states have acted independent of the federal agencies. The article concludes that concurrent jurisdiction of the antitrust laws is beneficial and produces the best outcomes for consumers.
Featured News
Banking Leaders Face New AI Risk as Regulators Crack Down on Dark Patterns
Jan 27, 2026 by
CPI
EU Pushes Google to Open Android AI Features and Search Data to Rivals
Jan 27, 2026 by
CPI
UK Regulator Opens Review into AI’s Growing Role in Retail Finance
Jan 27, 2026 by
CPI
Senate Antitrust Chair Flags Concerns Over Netflix’s Proposed Warner Deal
Jan 27, 2026 by
CPI
EU Designates WhatsApp as Very Large Platform Under Digital Services Act
Jan 26, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Hub-&-Spoke Conspiracies
Jan 26, 2026 by
CPI
A Data Analytics Company as the Hub in a Hub-and-Spoke Cartel
Jan 26, 2026 by
Joseph Harrington
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Jan 26, 2026 by
Patrick Van Cayseele
Hub-and-Spoke Collusion or Vertical Exclusion? Identifying the Rim in Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracies
Jan 26, 2026 by
Rosa Abrantes-Metz, Pedro Gonzaga, Laura Ildefonso & Albert Metz
The Algorithmic Middleman in a Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracy: Divergent Court Decisions and the Expanding Patchwork of State and Local Regulations
Jan 26, 2026 by
Bradley C. Weber