This Recent Development first considers the evolution of the Parker doctrine in a variety of contexts-with special attention to the Supreme Court's decision in Lafayette and the Court's rationale in Boulder. After discussing the recent lower federal court decisions that based the availability of the Parker exemption upon the existence of general home rule authority under the respective state's constitution, this Recent Development examines the problems posed by the Boulder decision for cities and states contemplating economic regulation tailored to particular local concerns. This Recent Development then analyzes the competing policy interests in the question of a home rule municipality's liability under the antitrust laws. In light of the Court's decision in Boulder to reject home rule authority as sufficient state authorization for an application of the Parker doctrine, this Recent Development concludes that the Supreme Court's approach in Boulder will be least burdensome for home rule municipalities if the Court utilizes a preemption rationale under the supremacy clause to avoid subjecting these cities to liability for treble damages under the antitrust laws.
David J. White,
Municipalities and the Antitrust Laws: Home Rule Authority is Insufficient to Ensure State Action Immunity,
35 Vanderbilt Law Review
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol35/iss4/4