The US Supreme Court decides a case interpreting the doctrine of state action immunity from federal antitrust liability (Phoebe Putney Health System)

I. The State Action Doctrine State Action immunity from the application of U.S. antitrust law was established by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Parker v. Brown [1]. Based on principles of federalism and deference to state powers to structure their own economic policy, the doctrine allows states and certain non-state actors to escape the restrictions imposed by federal antitrust law [2]. In Parkerthe Court held that “nothing in the language of the Sherman Act or in its history” suggested that Congress intended to restrict the sovereign capacity of the states to regulate their economies. The federal antitrust laws should not be read to bar States from imposing market restraints “as an act of government” [3]. While this protection was originally established for state actors, the

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Authors

  • University of Indiana - Maurer School of Law (Indianapolis)
  • University of Indiana - Maurer School of Law (Indianapolis)

Quotation

Max Huffman, Evan Bartel, The US Supreme Court decides a case interpreting the doctrine of state action immunity from federal antitrust liability (Phoebe Putney Health System), 19 February 2013, e-Competitions Bulletin US Supreme Court, Art. N° 51458

Visites 258

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues