Combating regulatory capture

Patrick Wyrick’s Medium post came across Twitter the other day. It addresses something that startup friends are probably paying attention to, but I doubt most are paying attention to:

…the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case this term that greatly improves startups’ ability to achieve favorable outcomes with state regulators. The case is North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101 (2015). In lawyerly terms, the Court’s holding was that State licensing boards controlled by market participants active in the market being regulated by those boards are not immune from federal antitrust liability unless they are subject to “active State supervision.” In less lawyerly terms, the Court said: if you’re a state regulatory board, and a majority of your members participate in the market you regulate, your members can be sued for antitrust violations, unless the State government has someone overseeing the board who can veto any actions you take that are anti-competitive.

This seems like a big deal not only because it puts future, less capitalized Ubers in a better position to fight the regulatory antics of politicians captured by union interests like Bill De Blasio, but also because it weakens the ability for industries suffering from regulatory capture to negatively impact the marketplace.