Washington, D.C.—A new report released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) outlines why expanding private antitrust litigation benefits only one group: plaintiffs’ lawyers looking to file more lawsuits and increase their paydays. The report comes as Congress considers multiple proposals aimed at changing U.S. antitrust law.
Private Antitrust Remedies: An Argument Against Further Stacking the Deck responds to the 2020 report from the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law. Private Antitrust Remedies calls on Congress to resist making it easier for private lawyers to file lawsuits that place undue burdens on the business community.
“As lawmakers debate changes to antitrust laws, the answer cannot be “let private lawyers file more lawsuits,” explained Harold Kim, president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. “The U.S. historically has the most expensive tort system in the world. The absolute last thing that businesses need, especially right now, are more expensive and time-consuming lawsuits.”
The report discusses:
- How current antitrust law provides robust protections for plaintiffs.
- How expanding private antitrust litigation will push companies into expensive and time-consuming litigation.
- The need to limit the amount of damages in antitrust litigation to align more with traditional tort law.
- Why Congress should keep arbitration as a fast and efficient way to resolve private antitrust disputes. Recent research shows consumers win more money, more often and more quickly in arbitration than in court.
Private Antitrust Remedies: An Argument Against Further Stacking the Deck is written by Jonathon E. Nuechterlein and Timothy J. Muris from Sidley Austin and released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform in partnership with the U.S. Chamber’s Antitrust Council.
