In the case of Gordon v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc., et al., 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and other defendants who were accused by a stockbroker named Gordon of violating antitrust laws through their commission rate-fixing practices. The plaintiff argued that these fixed rates constituted price fixing and thus violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act which prohibits contracts or conspiracies to restrain trade or commerce among states. However, upon review, it was determined that Congress had granted regulatory bodies such as Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) authority over this area including setting commission rates for securities transactions on national exchanges like NYSE. Therefore, these activities fell under an implied immunity from antitrust laws due to being heavily regulated by SEC with Congressional approval; hence they did not constitute illegal restraint on trade as alleged by Gordon.

In the dissenting opinion for Gordon v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc., Justice Powell argued that the majority's decision to uphold fixed commission rates set by the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and approved by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was a mistake. He believed this ruling contradicted previous antitrust laws designed to promote competition and prevent monopolies. In his view, allowing such price-fixing practices would harm investors who were forced to pay these non-negotiable fees without any competitive alternatives available in the market. Furthermore, he expressed concern that this ruling could potentially encourage other industries to seek similar regulatory protections from competition under federal law. Ultimately, Justice Powell felt that it should be Congress' responsibility - not SEC’s or NYSE’s -  to decide whether certain exceptions should apply when it comes to antitrust legislation.