Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, SUPREME COURT DOCKET: Recent decisions, cases, and petitions pending High Court review, (Aug 6, 2015)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

This Antitrust Law Daily feature presents a chart highlighting the decisions, arguments, briefs, and petitions on antitrust and trade regulation issues before the 2015 Term of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Currently, there are 11 antitrust and trade regulation cases that are awaiting Supreme Court Review. Two cases, Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez (Dkt. 14-857) and DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia(Dkt. 14-462), were granted review during the 2014 Term. The remaining nine cases await determination on whether the Court will grant review or not when it returns in October.

Latest RICO petition. In RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. The European Community, tobacco company RJR Nabisco, Inc. requests review of a Second Circuit decision finding that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) does not require the European Community—consisting of 26 member states—to plead that their injuries actually occurred in the United States. RICO, according to the Second Circuit opinion, applies to foreign conduct when liability is based on “racketeering acts” consisting of violations of predicate statutes that Congress expressly made applicable to foreign conduct. In its request for review, RJR asks whether, or to what extent RICO applies extraterritorially.

New First Amendment question involving public-issue advertisements. In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), American Freedom asks that the Supreme Court resolve a circuit split on the application of the First Amendment to the display of public-issue advertisements on government transit authority property. Specifically, American Freedom asks whether the MBTA created a public forum by accepting for display on its property a wide array of controversial political and public-issue ads, and thus violated the First Amendment by rejecting American Freedom’s ad based on its content; and regardless of the forum, whether the MBTA’s rejection of American Freedom’s ad based on an advertising guideline that prohibits ads considered by MBTA officials to be “demeaning and disparaging” was a viewpoint-based restriction of speech in violation of the First Amendment. The First Circuit affirmed denial of American Freedom’s requests for preliminary injunctions on the grounds that MBTA’s advertising space is a limited public forum and that its restrictions on American Freedom’s speech were reasonable and viewpoint neutral.

For details about these and other petitions and cases pending before the Supreme Court, please consult the chart of antitrust and trade regulation cases awaiting decision in the 2015 term. Issued opinions, granted petitions, pending petitions, and denied petitions are listed separately, along with a summary of the questions presented and the current status of each case.

News: Advertising RICO