Senior legal analyst Daniel Hanley details why the rule of reason should be completely abandoned in favor of bright-line rules.

The Rule of Reason is currently the default framework that judges use to determine whether a specific method of competition violates the antitrust laws. Comprehensive empirical reviews have shown that it largely results in de facto legality for most conduct reviewed under it. Among a surfiet of other problems, this Article calls for the ineffective rule of reason to be abandoned and bright-line rules, whose per se rules and presumptive violations allow for numerous benefits to the public, enforcers, firms, and the judiciary, be restored as a predominant component of antitrust law.

Read full article here.