The purpose of antitrust law is to prohibit those business practices, such as price-fixing or group boycotts, that limit competition and thus, in turn, result in consumer harm. As a result, vigorous enforcement of antitrust law, particularly in the health care arena — where affordable patient access to innovative procedures or drugs can substantially enhance quality of life — remains paramount.
This view has been shared by some key public officials, such as Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jonathan Leibowitz. History has shown, however, that resource-constrained state and federal officials often rely on the private bar to enjoin and/or deter anti-competitive practices. Now, with state and federal legislators pressing for substantial budget cuts to reduce unprecedented government deficits, the public may need to increase its reliance on private antitrust enforcement even further.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
