REX wants the Supreme Court to reconsider hearing its case

"Thus far, six appeals courts across the country have ruled on this issue and their decisions are split evenly with three saying optional rules can be an example of concerted action and three saying they cannot. REX claims that if the Supreme Court were to look at the ruling made by the Ninth Circuit in its appeal in comparison with the rulings made by the other appeals courts, they would see that the Ninth Circuit's decision lacks legal support."

"A ruling for REX would foster competition in the multi-trillion dollar residential real estate market while also closing a loophole in antitrust law that other associations of competitors could try to exploit, the petition states. If the loophole remains open, optional rules would become a new type of wink and nod used to achieve the same collusive effect of an express, binding agreement. Stopping concerted action through optional rules is critical."

REX urges Supreme Court review to resolve whether optional rules can constitute concerted action under antitrust law. Six federal appeals courts are split 3–3 on the question. A recent Seventh Circuit decision addressed the role of enforcing or following rules labeled optional when assessing concerted action. REX contends the Ninth Circuit’s contrary ruling lacks legal support. REX argues a Supreme Court decision would close an antitrust loophole, prevent optional rules from becoming a wink-and-nod pathway to collusion, and foster competition in the multi-trillion-dollar residential real estate market. REX filed the lawsuit in March 2021 alleging NAR and Zillow violated antitrust law.

Read at www.housingwire.com