George Leef explains for Forbes readers why a U.S. Supreme Court case involving North Carolina dentists and teeth whiteners is attracting attention from other fields.
Competition – everyone loves it, except when it’s competition in your particular business or profession. Then it’s dangerous and must be controlled if not eliminated.
Back in August, I wrote about the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners case, which involves the legality of efforts by that body to stop anyone who is not a licensed dentist from offering teeth whitening services. Upon digging further into the case, I learned that it has spawned a raging battle among legal groups, with four state bar associations weighing in on an amicus brief. They evidently fear that if the decision goes against the Board of Dental Examiners, that might undermine their ability to stifle competition in the market for legal help.
Opposing them is a brief submitted by Responsive Law, LegalZoom, and other self-help entities, backed by thirteen law professors. That brief turns over a rock and lets sunlight shine on nefarious anticompetitive doings.
First, however, what is the connection between the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners and the state bar associations (including the North Carolina bar)?
The common thread is that they are private organizations wielding governmental power (or what at least looks like governmental power) to prevent competition, without actually having been authorized by the public to act in that manner. If the Supreme Court rules that the Board of Dental Examiners is not above antitrust law when it tries to keep the teeth whitening business exclusively for dentists, then it might rule the same way about bar associations and their similar activities. That has them worried.
And what does the brief reveal? In general, that bar associations desire to stop competition from reducing billable hours for their members.
