United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975)

Contents:
Author: Justice Blackmun

Show Summary

United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975)

MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, dissenting.

I believe that the scope of the Clayton Act should be held to extend to acquisitions and sales having a substantial effect on interstate commerce. I therefore dissent. For me, the reach of § 7 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 731, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 18, is as broad as that of the Sherman Act, and should not be given the narrow construction we properly have given, just this Term, to the Robinson-Patman Act. Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co., 419 U.S. 186 (1974).

For more than a quarter of a century, the Court has held that the Sherman Act should be construed broadly to reach the full extent of the commerce power, and to proscribe those restraints that substantially affect interstate commerce. See, e.g., Mandeville Island Farms, Inc. v. American Crystal Sugar Co., 334 U.S. 219, 234 (1948); United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Assn., 322 U.S. 533, 558 (1944). The Clayton Act was enacted to supplement the Sherman Act, and to "arrest in its incipiency" any restraint or substantial lessening of competition. United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 353 U.S. 586, 589 (1957). To ascribe to Congress the intent to exercise less than its full commerce power in the Clayton Act, which has as its purpose the supplementation of the protections afforded by the Sherman Act, is both highly anomalous and, it seems to me, unwarranted. Section 7 should not be limited, as the Court limits it today, to corporations engaged in interstate commerce, but should be held to include those intrastate activities substantially affecting interstate commerce.

Contents:

Related Resources

None available for this document.

Download Options


Title: United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975)

Select an option:

*Note: A download may not start for up to 60 seconds.

Email Options


Title: United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975)

Select an option:

Email addres:

*Note: It may take up to 60 seconds for for the email to be generated.

Chicago: Blackmun, "Blackmun, J., Dissenting," United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975) in 422 U.S. 271 422 U.S. 288. Original Sources, accessed December 10, 2023, http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3UZNYKCHGAMWCFK.

MLA: Blackmun. "Blackmun, J., Dissenting." United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975), in 422 U.S. 271, page 422 U.S. 288. Original Sources. 10 Dec. 2023. http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3UZNYKCHGAMWCFK.

Harvard: Blackmun, 'Blackmun, J., Dissenting' in United States v. American Bldg. Maint. Indus., 422 U.S. 271 (1975). cited in 1975, 422 U.S. 271, pp.422 U.S. 288. Original Sources, retrieved 10 December 2023, from http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3UZNYKCHGAMWCFK.