Henry, et al. v. Brown University, et al. - The Sherman Antitrust Act and Institutions of Higher Education
- Liam Kelly
- Jan 12
- 2 min read
Updated: Feb 20
Theodore Evison
Abstract
Henry, et al. v. Brown University, et al., opened July 7, 2022, is a civil antitrust suit brought before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The suit implicates 17 elite, private universities in a conspiracy to participate in a price-fixing cartel designed to reduce or eliminate financial-aid as a locus of competition amongst conspirators. In doing so, the suit claims the defendants, elite universities such as Brown, Duke, MIT, Chicago, and Yale, have illegally inflated the net price of attendance for applicants and collectively overcharged over 200,000 financial-aid recipients by billions of dollars. The suit alleges, by per se and rule of reason standards of analyses, express violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This article will examine the nature of the suit, analyze the evidence which substantiates the plaintiffs' claims, and espouse a mechanistic analysis of the problematic conduct inherent therein.
I. Introduction
Higher education is internationally recognized as an essential pathway to upward mobility. In the United States, bachelor’s degree holders boast earnings 86% higher than those whose highest degree is a highschool diploma. Institutions of higher education in the U.S. are thus a unique gateway to prosperity and success. Recently however, these very institutions which we so often view as a gateway to the American dream, have become the gatekeepers of it. Since at least 2003, a group of elite, private universities across the United States have conspired to narrow this pathway for the people who need it most. The group, which consists of many of the most highly respected and competitive universities in the United States, have participated in a lucrative price-fixing cartel designed to “reduce or eliminate financial aid as a locus of competition”. In doing so, they have “artificially inflated the net price of attendance” for. . .
Comentários