Abstract

The "Fair Trade" Wall Crumbles

A case decided on May 21, 1951 originated when a New Orleans supermarket refused to go along with the minimum resale prices set by two national whiskey distillers and sold their whiskeys at substantial reductions, the fair-trade prices having been established in agreements to which the supermarket was not a party. Justice William O. Douglas, for the majority, pointed out that the Miller Tydings act, a fair trade act, did not turn over the whole problem of price handling to the states but granted only a "limited immunity" from the anti-trust laws. Narrowly construed, the decision holds that the non-signer clause of state fair-trade laws is invalid as applied to interstate commerce. Presumably manufacturers can still protect prices on branded products by obtaining agreements from all dealers.