This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle
Thomas Lambert, Apr 01, 2007
Judge Harold Leventhal famously remarked that examining legislative history is a bit like looking across a crowded cocktail party in search of your friends – you’re sure to find what you’re looking for. No doubt the same can be said of oral argument analysis. One is likely to infer from the judges’ questions and comments a leaning toward one’s favored position. Accordingly, I am only cautiously optimistic about the recent oral argument in Leegin v. PSKS, in which the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court appeared inclined to overrule a controversial (and, I believe, misguided) antitrust precedent.
