WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday abandoned a 96-year-old ban on manufacturers and retailers setting price floors for products.
In a 5-4 decision, the court said that agreements on minimum prices are legal if they promote competition.
The Supreme Court declared in 1911 that minimum pricing agreements violate federal antitrust law....
The principle that past decisions should be left alone ''does not compel our continued adherence'' in this instance, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote.
Respected authorities in the economics literature suggest that the long-standing decision ''is inappropriate, and there is now widespread agreement'' that price floors can help promote competition, Kennedy added.
''The only safe predictions to make about today's decision are that it will likely raise the price of goods at retail,'' Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in dissent.
It is the fourth antitrust ruling by the court in the last four months. In each instance, the court sided with defendants that were sued for anticompetitive conduct, including Wall Street investment banks and an international forest products company.
Is anyone starting to sense a pattern here?
No comments:
Post a Comment