Vaughn Walker, Apr 30, 2009
I do not argue here that concern about judicial competence regarding complex economic evidence is without substance. Nor do I contend that mergers are best committed in the final analysis to generalist judicial officers who lack expertise in issues of industrial organization although, as will be noted, this provides some check against complete capture of merger policy for purely political purposes. Rather, accepting that in the United States we have committed important decisions about mergers to generalist judges, I argue that a judge´s task in a merger case does not entail recondite analysis. Rather, the judge´s task is less one of economic learning than it is of using the economic analysis to bring the evidence into sufficient focus to reach a decision.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Senator Warner Calls for Treasury Oversight on Big Tech Sanctions
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Industry Minister Targets Grocery Giants with Antitrust Changes
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
DOT Issues Provisional Ruling Ending Delta-Aeroméxico Partnership
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
US Targets China with Proposed Rules on Cloud Giants in AI Development
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
Australia’s ACCC Finds Limited Evidence of Profiteering in Childcare Sector Despite Soaring Fees
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – The Rule(s) of Reason
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
Evolving the Rule of Reason for Legacy Business Conduct
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
The Object Identity
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
In Praise of Rules-Based Antitrust
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI
The Future of State AG Antitrust Enforcement and Federal-State Cooperation
Jan 29, 2024 by
CPI