The case Associated Food Retailers of Greater Chicago, Inc., et al. v. Jewel Tea Co., Inc., 1964 revolved around the issue of fair competition in business practices. The plaintiffs, a group of independent grocery retailers represented by Associated Food Retailers of Greater Chicago, accused Jewel Tea Co., a large chain store operator, of using predatory pricing to drive them out of business. They argued that this violated the Robinson-Patman Act which prohibits price discrimination intended to harm competition. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jewel Tea Co., stating that there was no evidence showing their pricing strategy had an adverse effect on competition or created a monopoly within the market area they operated in.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Associated Food Retailers of Greater Chicago, Inc. v. Jewel Tea Co., Inc., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting certain promotional practices by large grocery chains could potentially stifle competition and innovation in retail markets. The dissenting justices believed that such laws should be subject to strict scrutiny under antitrust principles, as they can have significant impacts on market dynamics and consumer welfare. They also expressed concern about potential unintended consequences of upholding these types of restrictions, including higher prices for consumers and reduced incentives for businesses to innovate or improve their services. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of relevant precedents and statutory provisions related to this issue.