In the case of United States Alkali Export Association, Inc. et al. v. United States in 1944, the Supreme Court ruled that a group of American companies exporting alkali were violating antitrust laws by forming an association to control prices and distribution overseas. The defendants argued they were exempt from these laws due to their activities being conducted outside U.S territory and because they had been encouraged by government officials who wanted to maintain good relations with Britain during World War II (as Britain was heavily dependent on American alkali). However, the court found that despite occurring abroad, their actions still significantly impacted domestic commerce and thus fell under U.S jurisdiction for antitrust regulation. Furthermore, it held that encouragement from government officials did not constitute legal immunity as there was no formal approval or legislation supporting this claim.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of United States Alkali Export Association, Inc. et al. v. United States, Justice Robert H. Jackson argued that the majority's decision to dissolve a trade association on antitrust grounds was misguided and potentially harmful to American industry in an increasingly globalized economy. He contended that such associations were necessary for U.S businesses to compete effectively with foreign corporations which often enjoyed state support or operated as monopolies in their home countries. Furthermore, he expressed concern about using antitrust laws designed for domestic markets being applied internationally without considering different market conditions and government policies abroad.