Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/12-133_19m1.pdf
Page Number: 19.0

6 

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO. v. ITALIAN COLORS 
RESTAURANT 
KAGAN, J., dissenting 

would? 

The  answer  becomes  all  the  more  obvious  given  the 
limits  we  have  placed  on  the  rule,  which  ensure  that  it 
does  not  diminish  arbitration’s  benefits.    The  rule  comes 
into  play  only  when  an  agreement  “operate[s]  . . .  as  a
prospective waiver”—that is, forecloses (not diminishes) a 
plaintiff ’s  opportunity  to  gain  relief  for  a  statutory  viola-
tion.  Mitsubishi, 473 U. S., at 637, n. 19.  So, for example, 
Randolph  assessed  whether  fees  in  arbitration  would  be 
“prohibitive”  (not  high,  excessive,  or  extravagant).  531 
U. S., at 90.  Moreover, the plaintiff must make that show-
ing  through  concrete  proof:  “[S]peculative”  risks,  “un-
founded assumptions,” and “unsupported statements” will
not suffice.  Id., at 90–91, and n. 6.  With the inquiry that
confined  and  the  evidentiary  requirements  that  high, 
courts have had no trouble assessing the matters the rule 
makes  relevant.  And  for  almost  three  decades,  courts 
have  followed  our  edict  that  arbitration  clauses  must 
usually  prevail,  declining  to  enforce  them  in  only  rare 
cases.  See  Brief  for  United  States  as  Amicus  Curiae  26– 
27.  The  effective-vindication  rule  has  thus  operated  year
in  and  year  out  without  undermining,  much  less  “de-
stroy[ing],”  the  prospect  of  speedy  dispute  resolution  that 
arbitration secures.  Ante, at 9. 

And  this  is  just  the  kind  of  case  the  rule  was  meant  to
address. 
Italian  Colors,  as  I  have  noted,  alleges  that
Amex  used  its  market  power  to  impose  a  tying  arrange-
ment in violation of the Sherman Act.  The antitrust laws, 
all  parties  agree,  provide  the  restaurant  with  a  cause  of 
action  and  give  it  the  chance  to  recover  treble  damages. 
Here, that would mean Italian Colors could take home up 
to  $38,549.    But  a  problem  looms.    As  this  case  comes  to 
us,  the  evidence  shows  that  Italian  Colors  cannot  prevail 
in  arbitration  without  an  economic  analysis  defining  the 
relevant  markets,  establishing  Amex’s  monopoly  power,
showing  anticompetitive  effects,  and  measuring  damages.