Skip to main content
Event

Roundtable on Exemptions and Immunities from Antitrust Laws

Date:
Location:

RFK Department of Justice Building, the Great Hall
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530
United States

Event Details

Makan Delrahim (center), Antitrust Division staff, Roundtable Participants, and members of the public participating in the Public Roundtable Discussion Series on Deregulation & Antitrust Law in the Great Hall of the Main Justice Building

Related pages:

Roundtable Information

The first roundtable examined exemptions and immunities from the antitrust laws, and their impact on the free market and consumers.  It also included a discussion of the appropriate role of the state action doctrine in light of the broader federal policy favoring competition in interstate commerce.

Date and Location

March 14, 2018
10:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m. EST

The Great Hall
Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Roundtable Agenda

Camera iconEvent photos

10:00 a.m.

Opening Remarks

Video iconView the opening remarks, introductions, statements, and Session 1.

document iconTranscript of the opening remarks, introductions, statements, and Session 1.

Makan Delrahim, Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust

10:05 a.m.

Introductions and Statements from Roundtable Participants

11:00 a.m.

Session 1

The impact of express statutory exemptions and implied immunities from the antitrust laws. We will explore how segments of the economy with express exemptions may be unique, review justifications for those exemptions, and consider whether they are, and continue to be, warranted. We will also evaluate whether statutory exemptions harm consumer welfare.

11:30 a.m.

Session 2

Video iconView Session 2 and Session 3.

document iconTranscript of Session 2 and Session 3.

How implied immunities and exemptions have affected antitrust enforcement.   We will examine the appropriate roles of Congress and the courts in creating immunities and exemptions from antitrust laws. We will discuss whether the “implied repeal” doctrine in Credit Suisse v. Billing, 551 U.S. 264 (2007), helps or hampers competition.

12:00 p.m.

Session 3

Whether the state action doctrine in its current form strikes the appropriate balance between state sovereignty and the federal policy favoring competition in interstate commerce.  We will assess policies and regulations states are adopting that may be considered exempt from antitrust scrutiny, and consider the resultant harm to competition and consumers.  We will also query whether the dormant Commerce Clause could provide a meaningful limit on states’ ability to reduce competition involving interstate commerce.

12:30 p.m.

Closing Statements from Roundtable Participants

Roundtable Participant Statements

American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust Law: John Roberti

American Antitrust Institute: Diana Moss

Consumers Union: George Slover

Open Markets Institute: Lina Khan

Public Knowledge: John Bergmayer

Heritage Foundation: Alden F. Abbott

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Craig Wolf

Association of Corporate Counsel: Glynis Bell

Public Comment Submissions

The Department of Justice welcomed comments in advance of each of the roundtables. The Department accepted public comments (not to exceed 20 pages) regarding the first roundtable until March 13, 2018. The comment period is now closed.

REG1-0001 Sherlock, James

REG1-0002 Global Antitrust Institute

REG1-0003 Association of Dental Support Organizations

REG1-0004 Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America

REG1-0005 Cleland, Scott

REG1-0006 National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

REG1-0007 Ballad Health

Privacy and confidentiality: Written submissions and the identity of the submitter may be disclosed, reproduced, and distributed by publication and/or posting on the Department of Justice website, at the discretion of the Department of Justice. Information that is submitted in connection with this event cannot be maintained as confidential by the Department of Justice. Written submissions should not include any information that the submitting person seeks to preserve as private or confidential.


Updated August 23, 2023
Topic
Antitrust