Sherman Antitrust Act
15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 7 · Read 2026-08-15
In force since 1890. Section 1 addresses agreements in restraint of trade, Section 2 monopolisation. Enforcement is shared between the Department of Justice and private plaintiffs, with treble damages under the Clayton Act.
Identifier
- Identifier
- 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 7
- Level
- Federal
- Status
- In force
- Adopted
- 1890-07-02
- Applies from
- 1890-07-02
- Supervisory bodies
- DOJ Antitrust, FTC
Named requirements
Contracts in restraint of trade
Agreements, combinations and conspiracies that restrain interstate or foreign trade.
Monopolisation
Monopolisation, attempted monopolisation and conspiracy to monopolise.
Territories and the District of Columbia
The same prohibitions applied to trade within the territories.
Criminal penalties
15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 2
Felony treatment with statutory maximum fines for corporations and individuals.
Official source
EU acts on the same ground
- tfeu-101
Article 101 TFEU covers the same ground as Section 1, and Article 102 TFEU corresponds to Section 2, but the EU route has no treble damages and no criminal liability for the undertaking itself.
United States case law
19 decisions · Read from CourtListener, Free Law Project on 2026-08-22.
- Rhonda Burnett v. Spring Way Center, LLC
8th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock
9th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Karen Cornish-Adebiyi v. Caesars Entertainment Inc
3rd Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- PhantomALERT Inc. v. Apple Inc.
D.C. Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Cumulus Media New Holdings Inc. v. the Nielsen Co. (US), LLC
2d Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Whittaker Clark & Daniels v.
3rd Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Jimmori Robinson v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
4th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Goldfinch Laboratory, P.C. v. Iowa Pathology Associates, P.C.
8th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Rx Solutions v. Caremark
5th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Malheur Forest Fairness Coalition v. Iron Triangle, LLC
9th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Seagate Technology LLC v. Nhk Spring Co., Ltd.
9th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
- Cherry Grove Beach Gear, LLC v. City of North Myrtle Beach
4th Cir.Open to review by a higher court, the source does not state the outcome
Ask NovaCopilotGet the opinionRetrieved directly from Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit when you click. No permanent storage on our side.
Change monitoring
The row is re-read against the publisher's own publication on a fixed interval. The dates below can be checked on the spot and travel with the API response.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Register | DOJ Antitrust, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 7 |
| Publisher | U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division |
| Last read | 2026-08-15 |
| Interval | Every 30 days |
| Next re-read | 2026-09-14 |
| Status | Re-read overdue |
Row history
Dated events concerning this exact row, newest first. No event appears here without a date in a primary source.
| Date | Event | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-15 | Row read against the official publication | U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division |
| 1890-07-02 | Adopted under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 7 | U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division |
| 1890-07-02 | Date of application according to the publisher | U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division |
Monitoring states when the row was checked, not how the legal position should be assessed.
Cite this row
The string below travels with a memo, a case file or an agent chain. The same string sits in the citation field of the API response.
15 U.S.C. §§ 1 to 7, Sherman Antitrust Act. NovaCopilot, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/regler/sherman-act (hämtad 2026-10-22, bevis sha256:8a2b1818fea05b69, bygge legal-2026-10-22).
- sha256:
- 8a2b1818fea05b6920e071259543fb87e6c6f5278bb42196f53d7bad2a87a5d3
- hämtad:
- 2026-10-22
- source_confidence:
- derived
- bygge:
- legal-2026-10-22
Derived path to the publisher. The address is built from the identifier and lands in the publisher's own register. uscode.house.gov.
The row is a source reference with an official identifier. No legal advice and no compliance decision.
Verifiable trust signals
- Source-linked answers and explicit evidence gaps
- Obligations, controls, risks and consequences
- Stable objects and verifiable checksums
- Rule-based objects, optional source-linked reasoning
- Model card, source status and audit