Georgia v. Evans

Background

The State of Georgia, which buys large amounts of asphalt for public road construction, sued private sellers who it said had combined to fix prices and suppress competition. Georgia sought to recover treble (threefold) damages under the Sherman Act’s civil-damages provision because it alleged it was harmed in its purchases. A federal district court dismissed Georgia’s suit on the ground that a State is not a “person” entitled to sue under that provision. The court of appeals affirmed, relying on an earlier case about whether the United States could recover damages.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether Congress, by using the word “person,” meant to let a State be a plaintiff seeking treble damages for antitrust injuries. The majority explained that the earlier decision about the United States did not control here because the United States has other enforcement tools that states do not. The Court noted that a State cannot bring criminal prosecutions or seize property under the Sherman Act and that denying any civil remedy would leave a State without redress. The Court also pointed to precedents allowing local governments to sue. On that basis the Court concluded a State can be treated as a “person” under the Act and reversed the dismissal.

Real world impact

States that buy goods or materials in interstate commerce and are harmed by price-fixing can now seek threefold damages under the Sherman Act. This gives state governments a practical civil remedy when their public projects suffer from anticompetitive conduct. The ruling does not address every possible limit on such suits and other legal questions may still be decided in later cases.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black agreed with the outcome. Justice Roberts disagreed, arguing the Act’s plain words exclude States and that courts should not rewrite the statute.