The US Supreme Court decides that states which don’t clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed a policy allowing hospitals authorities to make acquisitions wont be under the state-action immunity (FTC / Pheobe Putney)

This article briefly explores the applicability of federal antitrust laws to actions taken by municipalities or other state subdivisions and, specifically, whether they have acted pursuant to a clearly articulated state policy to displace competition in the marketplace. Federal antitrust laws are designed to prevent anticompetitive conduct in the market. Yet, the Supreme Court long ago held that antitrust laws do not apply against States themselves, even when they take actions with anticompetitive effects. Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 (1943). The Supreme Court also recognized that this state action immunity applied not only to states but also to municipalities or other state political subdivisions, and even private actors, provided they are acting pursuant to state authority. Thus,

L'accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés

Déjà abonné ? Identifiez-vous

L’accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés.

Lire gratuitement un article

Vous pouvez lire cet article gratuitement en vous inscrivant.

 

Version PDF

Auteurs

Citation

Luke Hasskamp, Aaron R. Gott, The US Supreme Court decides that states which don’t clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed a policy allowing hospitals authorities to make acquisitions wont be under the state-action immunity (FTC / Pheobe Putney), 19 février 2013, e-Competitions February 2013, Art. N° 99621

Visites 11

Tous les numéros

  • Latest News issue 
  • Tous les News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • Tous les Special issues