Municipal Antitrust Immunity after City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc., 111 S. Ct. 1344 (1991)

Authors

Brent S. Kinkade

Abstract

For most of this century, states and municipalities were immune from liability for anticompetitive action. However, in City of Lafayette v. Louisiana Power & Light Co., the Supreme Court sharply limited antitrust immunity for municipalities. The Lafayette Court held that municipal immunity only applied to municipalities following a clearly articulated state policy. In City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc, the Supreme Court has expanded the immunity available to municipalities by requiring only that a municipality's actions be a foreseeable result of a specific grant of state authority. This Note examines the history of municipal immunity and the Omni ruling. The Note argues that the foreseeability test is inadequate because it violates federalism principles and treats home rule municipalities inequitably. The Note concludes that the Omni rule should be broadened to protect home rule municipalities.

First Page

479

Recommended Citation

Brent S. Kinkade, Note, Municipal Antitrust Immunity after City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc., 111 S. Ct. 1344 (1991), 67 Wash. L. Rev. 479 (1992).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol67/iss2/7