Illuminating the Anti-Coercion Foundations of Refusals to Deal

For more than a century, anti-coercion has been a foundational principle for refusals to deal and anti-monopolization law in general. Since 2004, however, the Supreme Court has disregarded anti-coercion as an essential aspect underlying the legality of refusals to deal. Reviving this principle is critical to restoring refusals to deal as a viable and robust antitrust claim against monopolists.

By Daniel A. Hanley[1]

I. INTRODUCTION

Refusals to deal occur when a firm ceases engaging in business