Abstract
In Boulder, the Supreme Court apparently has settled the confusion created by the multiple opinions in Lafayette and the significant questions left unanswered in that case concerning the importance of the proprietary or regulatory nature of the challenged municipal activity and the effect of a state home rule provision. The result of Boulder is a further narrowing of the Parker exemption from the antitrust laws. Boulder offered the Court a chance to reject the tangent it had followed since Parker and to distinguish Lafayette, restricting its application to cities competing outside of their governmental boundaries. Instead, the Court continued its past line of analysis and created an analytical scheme under which municipalities, even those with broad home rule authority, will be forced to rely on the state for a clearly and affirmatively expressed state policy and even active state supervision before exercising their powers to restrain competition.
Recommended Citation
Shurtz, Steven P.
(1983)
"Community Communications Co. v. City of
Boulder: Denial of Parker Exemption
To Home Rule Cities,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1983:
No.
1, Article 4.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1983/iss1/4