Ohio v. American Express Co.
585 U.S. 529 · U.S. Supreme Court
Holding and boundaries
Rejected the antitrust challenge to Amex anti-steering provisions after defining the relevant two-sided transaction platform market.
Scope and limitations: Market definition, net effects and burden of proof were decisive; not a general approval of platform restraints.
2 issue placements
Antitrust, Market Concentration & Competition
Ohio v. American Express Co. rejects, narrows, limits, or supplies adverse authority relevant to Antitrust, Market Concentration & Competition. Fit tier: Direct. The placement must be used only within the holding and limitations recorded here.
Scope and limitations: Market definition, net effects and burden of proof were decisive; not a general approval of platform restraints.
Verification-state description: authoritative_text_identified; pinpoint_and_currentness_review_required
Digital Competition, Open Internet & Creator Rights
Ohio v. American Express Co. rejects, narrows, limits, or supplies adverse authority relevant to Digital Competition, Open Internet & Creator Rights. Fit tier: Strong analogue. The placement must be used only within the holding and limitations recorded here.
Scope and limitations: Market definition, net effects and burden of proof were decisive; not a general approval of platform restraints.
Verification-state description: authoritative_text_identified; pinpoint_and_currentness_review_required
Publication and provenance
The authority is published once; issue-specific orientation and fit remain separate placements. Analogue, contextual, and historical-adverse fits are not represented as controlling.
Published under research-publication-clearance-2026-07-21. deterministic validation and objective verification are not claimed.