Stephen D. Susman of Dallas, Texas, writes from the view of the private plaintiff. He decries the "damage . . . done to the antitrust laws in the name of efficiency and world competition." He describes how, even through the years of federal nonenforcement, the private plaintiff has been increasingly handicapped as antitrust litigant and is now frequently thrown out of court when the court (not the jury) determines that the weight of evidence is against it, or when the court accepts without factual inquiry defendants' Chicago School theory that this plaintiff could not have suffered "antitrust injury."
The final essay is by professor and former dean Robert Pitofsky of Georgetown Law Center, who gives a crisp retrospective, shows how the Supreme Court has generally rejected Chicago extremism, and stakes out ground for antitrust's future.