The Supreme Court
Credit: Tim Sackton / Flickr
The decision was overshadowed by other blockbuster cases and the announcement of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement, but the Supreme Court last week delivered the most significant antitrust opinion by the Court in more than a decade — one that made it extraordinarily more difficult for the government to rein in certain companies that abuse their market power. (emphasis added)
The case was Ohio v. American Express, and it arrived against a backdrop of growing public recognition of the excessive clout wielded by corporations over American workers and consumers, and rising interest in anti-monopoly law and policy, especially on the left.
In it, the Court dealt a huge blow to the ability of government and private plaintiffs to enforce existing antitrust laws, making it easier for dominant firms — especially those in the tech sector — to abuse their market power with impunity.
How American Express exerts pressure on merchants
This case asked whether certain restrictions American Express places on merchants violated the Sherman Act, which prohibits certain monopolistic behavior. American […]
In a capitaliat economy the way to get rich is to…1.) start rich, or 2.) steal or 3.) create a monopoly…. but never, ever compete. Competiion is destructive to all.
It is interesting to note that the definition of theft is a legal one in societies with weak moral compass. Here we see the power of the law in creating a new way for the already rich to steal through expanded monopoly power.
It is amazing what a self-serving class of foxes in $5000 suits can do to a hen house.