Never in the sixty-eight year history of the Clayton Act has a court compelled a divestiture at the request of a private party, yet the Supreme Court had considered divestiture a primary remedy for Clayton Act violations as early as 1961. The author reviews reasoning that supports and opposes divestiture as a private remedy and concludes that because of the powerful and complex issues of public policy, economics and law involved a legislative response should be awaited.
David S. Wise,
Divestiture as a Private Remedy,
Duq. L. Rev.
Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol20/iss4/5