On February 24, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a decision that authorized antitrust claims against dominant firms that engage in so-called “price-squeezes” — i.e., they sell their products at a price too low to allow competitors to make a profit. The decision was a victory for WLF, which filed a brief urging reversal. The Court agreed with WLF that consumers benefit when companies lower their prices and that companies should not be punished for engaging in price competition that is good for consumers. WLF had argued that the lower-court decision, unless reversed on appeal, would chill pro-consumer price cuts by companies that seek to avoid potential antitrust liability. The Court’s decision reaffirmed that the antitrust laws are intended to protect competition, not competitors. It noted that a company may suffer severe losses when a rival competes by slashing its prices, but antitrust law is not intended to stop such competition, which benefits the economy as a whole.