Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T14:12:22.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comment on Daniel A. Crane: A Premature Postmortem on the Chicago School of Antitrust

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2020

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Article Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Ganesh Sitaraman, Taking Antitrust Away from the Courts: A Structural Approach to Reversing the Second Age of Monopoly Power, Great Democracy Initiative, Sept. 2018 (Vanderbilt Law Research Paper No. 19–02, available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3278415).

2 See, for example, Rohit Chopra and Lina M. Khan, “The Case for Unfair Methods of Competition Rulemaking,” University of Chicago Law Review (forthcoming); and Vaheesan, Sandeep, “Resurrecting ‘A Comprehensive Charter of Economic Liberty’: The Latent Power of the Federal Trade Commission,” University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law 19, no. 3 (2018): 645–99Google Scholar.

3 See, for example, Sanjukta Paul, “Antitrust as Allocator of Coordination Rights,” UCLA Law Review 67 (forthcoming); and Vaheesan, Sandeep, “Accommodating Capital and Policing Labor: Antitrust in the Two Gilded Ages,” Maryland Law Review 78 (2019): 766827Google Scholar.