3 ms·
> What's wrong with that? I'm not really sure what is wrong with that, but the US Supreme Court seemed a bit troubled by it. There's a reasonably well cited su
by dguest 3y ago
> What's wrong with that?
I'm not really sure what is wrong with that, but the US Supreme Court seemed a bit troubled by it. There's a reasonably well cited summary on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil_Co._of_New_Jersey_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil_Co._of_New_Jersey...
- SllX 3y agoMore accurately it was the United States government which was troubled by it and prosecuted Standard Oil under the Sherman Antitrust act. Their case before the Supreme Court would have been Standard Oil’s final appeal (note how the prior is United States vs Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey but it flips when it comes before the Supreme Court). In an adversarial court system, it’s worth keeping in mind that while the Court is who you need to convince, the Court is not your adversary.