Posted on 01/18/2013 7:56:13 AM PST by illiac
Could be considered restraint of trade.
Contracts or combinations that tend, or are designed, to eliminate or stifle competition, create a Monopoly, artificially maintain prices, or otherwise hamper or obstruct the course of trade as it would be carried on if it were left to the control of natural economic forces.
As used in the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq.), unreasonable restraints of trade are illegal per se and interfere with free competition in business and commercial transactions. Such restraint tends to restrict production, affect prices, or otherwise control the market to the detriment of purchasers or consumers of goods and services. A restraint of trade that is ordinarily reasonable can be rendered unreasonable if it is accompanied by a Specific Intent to achieve the equivalent of a forbidden restraint.
Question: Do you expect a court to look at what New Jersey just did and call that a "restraint of trade"?
I wouldn’t expect any court that has a sitting democrat appointee to do anything to uphold the Constitution or the laws when it concerns democrats and unions.
Having served as a volunteer for people ruined in hurricane disasters, I feel truly sorry for the people in need of recovery. It won’t happen with Northeastern unions in total control of labor. A shortage of overpriced labor is the last thing they need. It’s cruel. Rubbing rock salt in the wounds of desparate people.
All taxpayers MUST contribute to the DNC via compulsory unions if they expect help from the Feds with expenditures their OWN, contributed tax dollars.............
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.