In the 1960 case Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference et al. v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., et al., trucking companies sued railroads and their public relations firm for antitrust violations, alleging that they conspired to influence legislation detrimental to the trucking industry. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroads, establishing what is now known as the "Noerr-Pennington Doctrine." This doctrine holds that efforts to petition government action are protected by the First Amendment's right to petition clause and cannot form basis for a lawsuit under antitrust laws even if intended to eliminate competition or harm competitors - unless such petitions are mere shams hiding attempts at direct interference with business relationships of competitors.

In the dissenting opinion for Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference et al. v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., et al., Justice Black argued that the majority's decision effectively granted immunity to businesses engaging in deceptive practices aimed at influencing legislation or executive action. He contended that such a ruling contradicted previous decisions and undermined antitrust laws designed to prevent monopolies and promote competition. According to him, if corporations could freely use their resources to manipulate public officials through misinformation campaigns without fear of legal repercussions, it would lead not only to unfair business practices but also potentially corrupt democratic processes by allowing powerful entities undue influence over policy-making. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Sherman Act exemptions as applicable in this case.