US DOJ defends per se theory in erosion control price-fixing case - MLex
mlex.com
The DOJ's defense of per se illegality in a price-fixing case reveals why antitrust law treats some collusion as so inherently harmful that no economic justification can save it.
Per Se RuleGame TheoryCartel TheoryAntitrust Economics
Theory Briefing
- The US DOJ is defending a per se theory in an erosion control price-fixing case, meaning it argues no business justification can excuse the conduct.
- Per se rules exist because cartels like price-fixing are so reliably anti-competitive that courts skip the full rule-of-reason balancing test entirely.
- The case tests whether per se doctrine remains robust, or whether defendants can carve out exceptions by framing collusion as industry coordination.