On June 28, 2021, the Supreme Court declined to take up an important antitrust refusal-to-deal case. The decision was a setback for WLF, which filed an amicus brief urging certiorari. Refusal-to-deal liability arises only when an alleged monopolist ends an established course of dealing without a rational business reason for doing so. Here, the defendant, which runs a clearing house for cable-television advertising, cut ties with the plaintiff, an advertising broker, because the defendant wanted to move into the plaintiff’s market. Moving into that market, and thereby cutting out the middleman, allowed the defendant to lower costs and create other efficiencies. WLF’s brief argued that the Supreme Court should intervene to prevent the lower courts from improperly straying from the “no rational reason” refusal-to-deal legal standard.