United States v. Cooper Corp.

Background

The dispute involved the federal government as a buyer and several companies accused of secretly agreeing to fix prices on items the government purchased. The government sued, seeking three times the money it said it lost under section 7 of the Sherman Act. The lower courts dismissed the claim on the ground that the United States is not a “person” under that section. The Supreme Court agreed to decide that precise question.

Reasoning

The Court focused on whether the phrase “any person” in section 7 was meant to include the United States. It found the ordinary meaning of “person” does not usually include the sovereign and noted structural clues: the same sentence refers to suits by one “person” against “any other person or corporation,” and the award of attorney’s fees fits private litigants. The Court relied on how other sections of the antitrust laws give specific remedies to the Government, related statutes that use similar wording, legislative history, and the long practice of no Government suits under section 7. These factors led the Court to conclude Congress did not intend to give the United States a section 7 treble-damage right.

Real world impact

Practically, federal purchasing agencies cannot use section 7 to recover triple damages for collusive price-fixing. The Government must rely on criminal prosecutions, injunctions, seizures, or new legislation to obtain monetary relief. The decision affirms dismissal of this suit and leaves it to Congress to create any broader civil remedy for the Government.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black (joined by Reed and Douglas) dissented, arguing the statute’s language and purpose require equal protection for all purchasers, including the United States, and that denying damages weakens enforcement against price-fixing.