Abstract
This Article explores the conflict between classic First Amendment doctrine and established antitrust jurisprudence in economic boycotts undertaken for political ends, so called "mixed-motive" boycotts. In the recent decision of FTC v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers, the Supreme Court expanded the per se doctrine of antitrust liability to collective political activity. Using this case as a backdrop for a broader discussion of the legality of concerted commercial activity undertaken for political ends, this Article argues that the Supreme Court has repeatedly failed to properly analyze mixed-motive boycotts in light of established First Amendment jurisprudence. It proposes a new analytic approach to such cases that balances competition policy with First Amendment values.
How to Cite
34 Ariz. L. Rev. 709 (1992)
110
Views
64
Downloads