U.S. PIRG Consumer Blog: Is American Bar Association becoming (more) like a corporate law association?

Over at the Consumer Law and Policy blog, consumer attorney Paul Bland of Public Justice has been chronicling his and others' laudatory efforts to derail a proposal before the American Bar Association to endorse a platform to make it even harder for consumers to avoid forced arbitration as they seek access to justice.

The ABA in that letter is "urging Congress not to pursue federal legislation that would undermine the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS Inc., arguing that allowing minimum resale price maintenance agreements can help boost competition."

On the other hand, both FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour and the prominent non-profit American Antitrust Institute had testified at that hearing that overturning Leegin was in the best interests of competition and consumers. From Harbour's written statement:

The Supreme Court’s 2007 Leegin decision gave manufacturers the right to set minimum resale prices for consumer goods, which typically thwarts discounting and leads to higher prices for consumers. This conduct used to be per se illegal under longstanding Supreme Court precedent."

The state of Maryland has pushed back against Leegin with new legislation. We agree with Bland. We agree with Harbour, Maryland legislators and AAI. We disagree with the ABA on both counts. Too many corporate defense lawyers bloating their various committees, pushing their one-sided agenda.