This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The Ninth Circuit held that the joint venture’s price‑unification could be a per se violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
According to Texaco Inc., according to Texaco Inc., texaco argues that a joint venture is entitled to set and unify prices for its gasoline products and therefore the price‑unification is not unlawful.
According to Mr. Alioto, the Government alleges that the price increase was 67 percent in major markets, suggesting an anticompetitive effect.
Respondents contend that because the parties are not competing with one another, an agreement to set identical prices cannot be a per se antitrust violation.
Background and question before the Court
The case concerns whether a price‑unification agreement between Shell and Texaco, formed through a joint venture, violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Chief Justice Roberts asked whether the Citizens Publishing case required a finding that the joint venture was unlawful.
What each side argues
Texaco Inc.
According to Texaco Inc., according to Texaco Inc., texaco contends that the joint venture may set and unify prices for its gasoline products.
Glen D. Nager argued that the joint venture eliminated competition between Shell and Texaco, so no further anticompetitive consequence could arise.
Respondents
Respondents argue that because the parties are not competing, an agreement to set identical prices cannot be a per se antitrust violation.
U.S. Department of Justice (Government)
According to Mr. Alioto (Government), according to Mr. Alioto (Government), the Government wants to maintain independent identity while fixing gasoline prices nationwide.
Shell Oil Company
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
What happened at oral argument
Chief Justice Roberts asked whether the Citizens Publishing case required a finding that the joint venture was unlawful.
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts also questioned whether a joint venture could set prices on one corner while competing elsewhere.
Justice Breyer asked if the rule of reason had been waived in this case.
Justice Ginsburg asked whether the ordinary rule of reason had been waived.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- a26e2db7e5078302c24b-r1-01c128fd79f88b75.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 21, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.