Court Opinion

ID: 9426151
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:16:59.285248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:59.349789
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Douglas,
with whom Mr. Justice Brennan joins, dissenting.
For the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co., 419 U. S. 186, 204-*287207 (1974), decided earlier this Term, I cannot agree that the “in commerce” language of § 7 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 731, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 18, was intended to give that statute a narrower jurisdictional reach than the “affecting commerce” standard which we have read into the Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 1 et seq. On the record in this case, it is beyond question that the activities of the acquired firms have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. I would therefore reverse the summary judgment granted below and remand for further proceedings in the District Court.