In the case of Besser Manufacturing Co. et al. v. United States, 1951, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court's decision that Besser Manufacturing and other companies had violated antitrust laws by conspiring to monopolize trade and commerce in concrete block-making machinery and parts within the U.S., its territories, possessions, and foreign countries where American law applies. The defendants were found guilty of price-fixing agreements which resulted in artificially high prices for their products as well as limiting production to control market supply. They also engaged in tactics designed to eliminate competition such as exclusive dealing contracts with customers who agreed not to use competitors' products or services; this was deemed illegal under Section 3 of the Clayton Act (1914). The Supreme Court affirmed these findings despite arguments from defendants about lack of substantial evidence supporting conspiracy charges.

In the dissenting opinion for Besser Manufacturing Co. et al. v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a cease and desist order from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Besser Manufacturing Company and its competitors was incorrect because it failed to consider whether or not there were any actual anti-competitive effects resulting from their actions. The dissenting justices believed that while these companies did engage in price-fixing activities, such behavior should only be considered illegal if it can be proven to have an adverse impact on competition within their industry sector. They also criticized the FTC for overstepping its boundaries by trying to regulate business practices which are not explicitly covered under existing antitrust laws, arguing that this could potentially lead to arbitrary enforcement of these regulations based on subjective interpretations of what constitutes "unfair" trade practices.