135 S. Ct. 1101 (2015)
The case of North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC is a significant antitrust case scrutinizing the boundaries of the state-action doctrine, which insulates states and state-related entities from antitrust liability.
Does a regulatory state agency composed primarily of market participants enjoy immunity from antitrust law under the state-action doctrine when the agency is not actively supervised by the state?
A state board majority-composed of active market participants is not immune from antitrust law unless the state actively supervises the board's anticompetitive conduct.
The Supreme Court held that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners was not entitled to state-action immunity because it exercised anticompetitive conduct without active state supervision.
This case establishes a critical benchmark for determining when professional regulatory boards may claim antitrust immunity. It emphasizes the necessity of state oversight to ensure that boards do not misuse regulatory power to protect incumbents at the expense of competition. Law students should understand this decision as it highlights the balance between state control and federal antitrust principles, providing a pathway for future antitrust challenges against similar state boards.