NC BD. of Dental Examiners v. FTC (574 U.S. 494)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 25, 2015 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 574 U.S. 494 · 135 S. Ct. 1101
- Decided
- February 25, 2015
- Term
- October Term 2014
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Kennedy
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice KENNEDYdelivered the opinion of the Court. This case arises from an antitrust challenge to the actions of a state regulatory board. A majority of the board's members are engaged in the active practice of the profession it regulates. The question is whether the board's actions are protected from Sherman Act regulation under the doctrine of state-action antitrust immunity, as defined and applied in this Court's decisions beginning with Parker v. Brown,317 U.S. 341, 63 S.Ct. 307, 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943). I A In its Dental Practice Act (Act), North Carolina has declared the practice of dentistry to be a matter of public concern requiring regulation. N.C. Gen.Stat. Ann. § 90-22(a) (2013). Under the Act, the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners (Board) is "the agency of the State for the regulation of the practice of dentistry." § 90-22(b). The Board's principal duty is to create, administer, and enforce a licensing system for dentists. See §§ 90-29 to 90-41. To perform that function it has broad authority over licensees. See § 90-41. The Board's authority with respect to unlicensed persons, however, is more restricted: like "any resident citizen," the Board may file suit to "perpetually enjoin any person from ... unlawfully practicing dentistry." § 90-40.1. The Act provides that six of the Board's eight members must be licensed dentists engaged in the active practice…
Excerpt of a 57,991-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.