SCOTUS, Douglas Ginsburg, Derek Moore, Apr 01, 2010
Neoclassical economics or “price theory” has had a profound effect upon antitrust analysis, first as practiced in academia and then as reflected in the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States. More recently, behavioral economics has had a large and growing influence upon legal scholarship generally. Still, behavioral economics has not yet affected judicial decisions in the United States in any substantive area of law. The question we address is whether that is likely to change in the foreseeable future, i.e., whether the courts’ present embrace of price theory in antitrust cases portends the courts’ imminent acceptance of behavioral economics in either antitrust or consumer protection cases.
Featured News
Dozens of State AGs Demand AI Companies Fix ‘Delusion’ Outputs by Chatbots
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Texas Sues Epic Systems, Accusing Health-Tech Giant of Anticompetitive Data Practices
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Court Affirms Apple Injunction but Trims Limits in Epic Dispute
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Cloud Providers Challenge EU Approval of Broadcom–VMware Deal
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
NASCAR, 23XI and Front Row Settle Antitrust Dispute in Confidential Agreement
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Acqui-hiring
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Anticompetitive Effects of Acquihires: Labor and Product Markets
Dec 11, 2025 by
Heski Bar-Isaac, Justin Johnson & Volker Nocke
Acquihires In the Technology Sector: Antitrust Scrutiny Through the Lens of Economics
Dec 11, 2025 by
Juliette Caminade, Rebecca Kirk Fair, Zsolt Udvari & Jeanne Vellard Smith
M&A in the AI Era: Considerations for Acquihiring
Dec 11, 2025 by
Ingrid Vandenborre, Kenneth Schwartz, Christopher Barlow, Page Griffin, Michael Cardella, Stuart Levi, Taylor Votek, Benjamin Salzer, Lisa G. Liu & Liz Kraus
Lock Them Up, or Take No Prisoners? Merger Policy and Acquiring AI Talent: Human Rights and Other Inconvenient Facts
Dec 11, 2025 by
Simon R. Pritchard