[quote=urbanrealtor]Wow.
Lots of problems with the facts here.
The California Bar is not a private organization.
It is an administrative arm of the California Supreme Court.
It is, by definition, part of the government.
The term monopoly does not generally apply to governments.[/quote]
de jure, the California Supreme Court has authority over admissions, professional codes of conduct, and actual suspensions/disbarment. de facto the bar handles this stuff itself.
But the U.S. Supreme Court found that the California Bar Association is more akin to a labor union than a government agency in Keller v. State Bar of California, overruling the California Supreme Court in the process. The decision in that case was limited to 1st and 14th amendment issues and resulted in a sharp curtailment of the bar’s lobbying activities. The Supremes said in their decision that they wouldn’t have had the authority if the bar was a “normal” government agency.
[quote]The CAR (AKA CREA) does not hold public regulatory standing in the same way and is therefore not analogous.[/quote]
The MLS is the problem. See below.
[quote]Peer review applies to all the occupations you mentioned.[/quote]
You’re stretching things beyond recognition, so I’ll let it pass and get to the main course:
[quote]Your assertion that the NAR functions as a monopoly also flies in the face of like half the industry.
Most licensed agents are not members. There is no requirement to be a member to sell property, negotiate property contracts, rent property, use CAR forms, or join the MLS.
Also, those statutes are applicable any time that there are allegations of unfair asymmetrical competition.
The NAR’s conduct was certainly unfair but it meets none of the minimum criteria for monopoly.[/quote]
Let’s assume you are right, and the NAR and its regional affiliates don’t operate a monopoly, specifically the MLS. So what’s the problem if they limit access as they see fit as long as they don’t discriminate on the basis of race, etc.? They are private entities and run a private system, right?
Answer: it only becomes a problem when it’s a monopoly that operates in restraint of trade, and that’s what the NAR got nailed for.
Microsoft tried the same arguments about competition you just used, and they lost both their trial and appeal. A monopoly doesn’t have to run 100% of the market to be a monopoly; even Standard Oil at its peak controlled only 85% of the retail petroleum market.
