american
express
co
et
al
italian
colors
restaurant
et
argued
february
decided
june
agreement
petitioners
american
express
subsidiary
respondents
merchants
accept
american
express
cards
requires
disputes
resolved
arbitration
provides
shall
right
authority
claims
arbitrated
class
action
basis
respondents
nonetheless
filed
class
action
claiming
petitioners
violated
sherman
act
seeking
treble
damages
class
clayton
act
petitioners
moved
compel
individual
arbitration
federal
arbitration
act
faa
respondents
countered
cost
expert
analysis
necessary
prove
antitrust
claims
greatly
exceed
maximum
recovery
individual
plaintiff
district
granted
motion
dismissed
lawsuits
second
circuit
reversed
remanded
holding
prohibitive
costs
respondents
face
arbitrate
waiver
unenforceable
arbitration
proceed
circuit
stood
reversal
remanded
light
animalfeeds
international
held
party
may
compelled
submit
class
arbitration
absent
agreement
held
faa
permit
courts
invalidate
contractual
waiver
class
arbitration
ground
plaintiff
cost
individually
arbitrating
federal
statutory
claim
exceeds
potential
recovery
pp
faa
reflects
overarching
principle
arbitration
matter
contract
see
west
jackson
courts
must
rigorously
enforce
arbitration
agreements
according
terms
dean
witter
reynolds
byrd
even
claims
alleging
violation
federal
statute
unless
faa
mandate
contrary
congressional
command
compucredit
greenwood
pp
contrary
congressional
command
requires
rejection
waiver
antitrust
laws
guarantee
affordable
procedural
path
vindication
every
claim
see
rodriguez
evince
intention
preclude
waiver
procedure
mitsubishi
motors
congressional
approval
federal
rule
civil
procedure
establish
entitlement
class
proceedings
vindication
statutory
rights
rule
imposes
stringent
requirements
certification
exclude
claims
rejected
assertion
requirement
must
dispensed
prohibitively
high
cost
compliance
frustrate
plaintiff
attempt
vindicate
policies
underlying
antitrust
laws
eisen
carlisle
jacquelin
pp
effective
vindication
exception
originated
dictum
mitsubishi
motors
soler
also
invalidate
instant
arbitration
agreement
exception
comes
desire
prevent
prospective
waiver
party
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
fact
worth
expense
involved
proving
statutory
remedy
constitute
elimination
right
pursue
remedy
cf
gilmer
lane
vimar
seguros
reaseguros
sky
reefer
mobility
llc
concepcion
resolves
case
finding
law
conditioned
enforcement
arbitration
availability
class
procedure
interfered
fundamental
arbitration
attributes
specifically
rejected
argument
class
arbitration
necessary
prosecute
claims
might
otherwise
slip
legal
system
pp
reversed
scalia
delivered
opinion
roberts
kennedy
thomas
alito
joined
thomas
filed
concurring
opinion
kagan
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
breyer
joined
sotomayor
took
part
consideration
decision
case
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
american
express
company
et
petitioners
italian
colors
restaurant
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
scalia
delivered
opinion
consider
whether
contractual
waiver
class
arbitration
enforceable
federal
arbitration
act
plaintiff
cost
individually
arbitrating
federal
statutory
claim
exceeds
potential
recovery
respondents
merchants
accept
american
express
cards
agreement
petitioners
american
express
wholly
owned
subsidiary
contains
clause
requires
disputes
parties
resolved
arbitration
agreement
also
provides
shall
right
authority
claims
arbitrated
class
action
basis
american
express
merchants
litigation
respondents
brought
class
action
petitioners
violations
federal
antitrust
laws
according
respondents
american
express
used
monopoly
power
market
charge
cards
force
merchants
accept
credit
cards
rates
approximately
higher
fees
competing
credit
tying
arrangement
respondents
said
violated
sherman
act
sought
treble
damages
class
clayton
act
petitioners
moved
compel
individual
arbitration
federal
arbitration
act
faa
et
seq
resisting
motion
respondents
submitted
declaration
economist
estimated
cost
expert
analysis
necessary
prove
antitrust
claims
least
several
hundred
thousand
dollars
might
exceed
million
maximum
recovery
individual
plaintiff
trebled
app
district
granted
motion
dismissed
lawsuits
appeals
reversed
remanded
proceedings
held
respondents
established
incur
prohibitive
costs
compelled
arbitrate
class
action
waiver
waiver
unenforceable
arbitration
proceed
american
express
merchants
litigation
granted
certiorari
vacated
judgment
remanded
consideration
light
animalfeeds
held
party
may
compelled
submit
class
arbitration
absent
agreement
american
express
italian
colors
restaurant
appeals
stood
reversal
stating
earlier
ruling
compel
class
arbitration
american
express
merchants
litigation
sua
sponte
reconsidered
ruling
light
mobility
llc
concepcion
held
faa
state
law
barring
enforcement
waiver
finding
mobility
inapplicable
addressed
appeals
reversed
third
time
denied
rehearing
en
banc
five
judges
dissenting
american
express
merchants
litigation
granted
certiorari
consider
question
hether
federal
arbitration
act
permits
courts
invalidate
arbitration
agreements
ground
permit
class
arbitration
claim
pet
cert
ii
congress
enacted
faa
response
widespread
judicial
hostility
arbitration
see
mobility
supra
slip
relevant
act
provides
written
provision
maritime
transaction
contract
evidencing
transaction
involving
commerce
settle
arbitration
controversy
thereafter
arising
contract
transaction
shall
valid
irrevocable
enforceable
save
upon
grounds
exist
law
equity
revocation
contract
text
reflects
overarching
principle
arbitration
matter
contract
see
west
jackson
slip
consistent
text
courts
must
rigorously
enforce
arbitration
agreements
according
terms
dean
witter
reynolds
byrd
including
terms
specify
parties
choose
arbitrate
disputes
supra
rules
arbitration
conducted
volt
information
sciences
board
trustees
leland
stanford
junior
holds
true
claims
allege
violation
federal
statute
unless
faa
mandate
contrary
congressional
command
compucredit
greenwood
slip
quoting
express
mcmahon
iii
contrary
congressional
command
requires
us
reject
waiver
class
arbitration
respondents
argue
requiring
litigate
claims
individually
contracted
contravene
policies
antitrust
laws
antitrust
laws
guarantee
affordable
procedural
path
vindication
every
claim
congress
taken
measures
facilitate
litigation
antitrust
claims
example
enacted
remedy
see
treble
damages
enacting
measures
congress
told
us
willing
go
certain
respects
beyond
normal
limits
law
advancing
goals
deterring
remedying
unlawful
trade
practice
say
congress
must
intended
whatever
departures
normal
limits
advance
antitrust
goals
simply
irrational
legislation
pursues
purposes
costs
rodriguez
per
curiam
antitrust
laws
evinc
intention
preclude
waiver
procedure
mitsubishi
motors
soler
sherman
clayton
acts
make
mention
class
actions
fact
enacted
decades
advent
federal
rule
civil
procedure
designed
allow
exception
usual
rule
litigation
conducted
behalf
individual
named
parties
califano
yamasaki
parties
agreed
arbitrate
pursuant
usual
rule
remarkable
erase
expectation
congressional
approval
rule
establish
entitlement
class
proceedings
vindication
statutory
rights
begin
likely
entitlement
invalidating
private
arbitration
agreements
denying
class
adjudication
abridg
ment
modif
ication
substantive
right
forbidden
rules
see
evidence
entitlement
event
rule
imposes
stringent
requirements
certification
practice
exclude
claims
specifically
rejected
assertion
one
requirements
requirement
must
dispensed
prohibitively
high
cost
compliance
frustrate
plaintiff
attempt
vindicate
policies
underlying
antitrust
laws
eisen
carlisle
jacquelin
one
might
respond
perhaps
federal
law
secures
nonwaivable
opportunity
vindicate
federal
policies
satisfying
procedural
strictures
rule
invoking
informal
class
mechanism
arbitration
already
rejected
proposition
mobility
slip
iv
finding
contrary
congressional
command
end
case
respondents
invoke
exception
faa
say
serves
harmonize
competing
federal
policies
allowing
courts
invalidate
agreements
prevent
effective
vindication
federal
statutory
right
enforcing
waiver
class
arbitration
bars
effective
vindication
respondents
contend
economic
incentive
pursue
antitrust
claims
individually
arbitration
effective
vindication
exception
respondents
allude
originated
dictum
mitsubishi
motors
expressed
willingness
invalidate
public
policy
grounds
arbitration
agreements
operat
prospective
waiver
party
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
emphasis
added
dismissing
concerns
arbitral
forum
inadequate
said
long
prospective
litigant
effectively
may
vindicate
statutory
cause
action
arbitral
forum
statute
continue
serve
remedial
deterrent
function
subsequent
cases
similarly
asserted
existence
effective
vindication
exception
see
penn
plaza
llc
pyett
gilmer
lane
similarly
declined
apply
invalidate
arbitration
agreement
described
exception
finds
origin
desire
prevent
prospective
waiver
party
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
mitsubishi
motors
supra
emphasis
added
certainly
cover
provision
arbitration
agreement
forbidding
assertion
certain
statutory
rights
perhaps
cover
filing
administrative
fees
attached
arbitration
high
make
access
forum
impracticable
see
green
tree
financial
randolph
may
well
existence
large
arbitration
costs
preclude
litigant
effectively
vindicating
federal
statutory
rights
fact
worth
expense
involved
proving
statutory
remedy
constitute
elimination
right
pursue
remedy
see
jacobs
dissenting
denial
rehearing
en
banc
waiver
merely
limits
arbitration
two
contracting
parties
eliminates
parties
right
pursue
statutory
remedy
federal
law
adoption
class
action
legal
relief
see
fed
rule
civ
proc
supp
wright
miller
kane
federal
practice
procedure
ed
put
differently
individual
suit
considered
adequate
assure
effective
vindication
federal
right
adoption
procedures
suddenly
become
ineffective
vindication
upon
pair
cases
brings
home
point
gilmer
supra
qualms
enforcing
class
waiver
arbitration
agreement
even
though
federal
statute
issue
age
discrimination
employment
act
expressly
permitted
collective
actions
said
statutory
permission
mean
individual
attempts
conciliation
intended
barred
vimar
seguros
reaseguros
sky
reefer
held
requiring
arbitration
foreign
country
compatible
federal
carriage
goods
sea
act
legislation
prohibited
agreement
liability
carrier
damaged
goods
quoting
app
ed
close
codification
effective
vindication
exception
rejected
argument
inconvenience
costs
proceeding
abroad
lessen
ed
defendants
liability
stating
unwieldy
unsupported
terms
policy
statute
require
courts
proceed
case
case
tally
costs
burdens
particular
plaintiffs
light
means
size
claims
relative
burden
carrier
tally
ing
costs
burdens
precisely
dissent
impose
upon
federal
courts
truth
tell
decision
mobility
resolves
case
invalidated
law
conditioning
enforcement
arbitration
availability
class
procedure
law
interfere
fundamental
attributes
arbitration
slip
switch
bilateral
class
arbitration
said
sacrifices
principal
advantage
arbitration
informality
makes
process
slower
costly
likely
generate
procedural
morass
final
judgment
slip
specifically
rejected
argument
class
arbitration
necessary
prosecute
claims
might
otherwise
slip
legal
system
slip
regime
established
appeals
decision
require
plaintiff
held
contractually
agreed
bilateral
arbitration
federal
determine
parties
litigate
legal
requirements
success
merits
evidence
necessary
meet
requirements
cost
developing
evidence
damages
recovered
event
success
preliminary
litigating
hurdle
undoubtedly
destroy
prospect
speedy
resolution
arbitration
general
bilateral
arbitration
particular
meant
secure
faa
sanction
judicially
created
superstructure
judgment
appeals
reversed
ordered
justice
sotomayor
took
part
consideration
decision
case
thomas
concurring
american
express
company
et
petitioners
italian
colors
restaurant
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
thomas
concurring
join
opinion
full
write
separately
note
result
also
required
plain
meaning
federal
arbitration
act
mobility
llc
concepcion
explained
faa
requires
agreement
arbitrate
enforced
unless
party
successfully
challenges
formation
arbitration
agreement
proving
fraud
duress
concurring
opinion
slip
case
italian
colors
makes
two
arguments
support
conclusion
arbitration
agreement
enforced
first
contends
enforcing
arbitration
agreement
contravene
policies
antitrust
laws
ante
second
contends
may
invalidate
agreements
prevent
vindication
federal
statutory
right
ante
neither
argument
concern
whether
contract
properly
made
concepcion
supra
thomas
concurring
slip
italian
colors
furnished
grounds
revocation
contract
arbitration
agreement
must
enforced
italian
colors
voluntarily
entered
contract
containing
bilateral
arbitration
provision
escape
obligations
merely
claim
wishes
bring
might
economically
infeasible
kagan
dissenting
american
express
company
et
petitioners
italian
colors
restaurant
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
kagan
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
join
dissenting
nutshell
version
case
unfortunately
obscured
decision
owner
small
restaurant
italian
colors
thinks
american
express
amex
used
monopoly
power
force
merchants
accept
form
contract
violating
antitrust
laws
restaurateur
wants
challenge
allegedly
unlawful
provision
imposing
tying
arrangement
contract
arbitration
clause
prevents
term
imposes
variety
procedural
bars
make
pursuit
antitrust
claim
fool
errand
arbitration
clause
enforceable
amex
insulated
antitrust
liability
even
fact
violated
law
monopolist
gets
use
monopoly
power
insist
contract
effectively
depriving
victims
legal
recourse
nutshell
version
today
opinion
admirably
flaunted
rather
camouflaged
darn
bad
answer
betrayal
precedents
federal
statutes
like
antitrust
laws
decisions
developed
mechanism
called
rule
prevent
arbitration
clauses
choking
plaintiff
ability
enforce
congressionally
created
rights
doctrine
bars
applying
clause
operates
confer
immunity
potentially
meritorious
federal
claims
rule
reconciles
federal
arbitration
act
faa
rest
federal
law
indeed
promotes
fundamental
purposes
faa
applied
rule
ensure
amex
arbitration
clause
foreclose
italian
colors
vindicating
right
redress
antitrust
harm
majority
barely
tries
explain
reaches
contrary
result
notes
decided
exact
case
neglecting
principle
established
fits
case
hand
glove
concocts
special
exemption
waivers
ignoring
case
concerns
much
throughout
majority
disregards
decisions
central
tenet
arbitration
clause
may
thwart
federal
law
exactly
today
prevents
effective
vindication
federal
statutory
rights
respectfully
dissent
start
uncontroversial
proposition
refuse
enforce
exculpatory
clause
insulating
company
antitrust
liability
say
merchants
may
bring
sherman
act
claims
even
clause
contained
arbitration
agreement
see
ante
congress
created
sherman
act
private
cause
action
solely
compensate
individuals
promote
public
interest
vigilant
enforcement
antitrust
laws
lawlor
national
screen
service
accordingly
courts
enforce
prospective
waiver
right
gain
redress
antitrust
injury
whether
arbitration
agreement
contract
see
mitsubishi
motors
soler
rule
applies
important
federal
statutory
rights
see
penn
plaza
llc
pyett
age
discrimination
employment
act
brooklyn
savings
bank
fair
labor
standards
act
necessity
nowhere
evident
antitrust
context
without
rule
company
use
monopoly
power
protect
monopoly
power
coercing
agreement
contractual
terms
eliminating
antitrust
liability
rule
limited
baldly
exculpatory
however
monopolist
devise
numerous
ways
around
consider
several
alternatives
party
drafting
arbitration
agreement
adopt
avoid
antitrust
liability
identical
effect
front
end
agreement
might
set
outlandish
filing
fees
establish
absurd
statute
limitations
thus
preventing
claimant
gaining
access
arbitral
forum
back
end
agreement
might
remove
arbitrator
authority
grant
meaningful
relief
judgment
gets
claimant
nothing
worthwhile
middle
agreement
might
block
claimant
presenting
kind
proof
necessary
establish
defendant
liability
say
prohibiting
economic
testimony
good
luck
proving
antitrust
claim
without
else
agreement
might
appoint
arbitrator
obviously
biased
person
say
ceo
amex
possibilities
endless
less
direct
express
exculpatory
clause
less
fatal
rule
prospective
waivers
federal
rights
work
applies
contract
clause
explicitly
barring
claim
others
operate
sure
enough
cases
establish
proposition
arbitration
clause
enforced
prevents
effective
vindication
federal
statutory
rights
however
achieves
result
rule
originated
mitsubishi
held
claims
brought
sherman
act
federal
laws
generally
subject
arbitration
agreeing
arbitrate
claim
explained
party
forgo
substantive
rights
afforded
statute
submits
resolution
arbitral
rather
judicial
forum
ibid
crucial
decision
limiting
principle
designed
safeguard
federal
rights
arbitration
clause
enforced
long
prospective
litigant
effectively
may
vindicate
statutory
cause
action
arbitral
forum
arbitration
provision
operated
prospective
waiver
party
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
emphasized
condemn
similarly
stated
clause
set
aside
proceedings
contractual
forum
gravely
difficult
claimant
practical
purposes
deprived
day
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
decades
since
mitsubishi
repeated
admonition
time
instructing
courts
enforce
arbitration
agreement
effectively
even
explicitly
forecloses
plaintiff
remedying
violation
federal
statutory
right
see
gilmer
lane
vimar
seguros
reaseguros
sky
reefer
penn
plaza
decision
green
tree
financial
randolph
confirmed
principle
applies
agreement
thwarts
federal
law
making
arbitration
prohibitively
expensive
plaintiff
seeking
relief
truth
lending
act
argued
arbitration
agreement
unenforceable
create
risk
bear
prohibitive
arbitration
costs
form
high
filing
administrative
fees
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
rejected
contention
doubted
fees
prevent
effective
vindication
statutory
rights
contrary
invoked
rule
mitsubishi
making
clear
applied
case
us
see
indeed
added
burden
proof
held
party
asserting
federal
right
seeks
invalidate
arbitration
agreement
ground
arbitration
prohibitively
expensive
party
bears
burden
showing
likelihood
incurring
costs
randolph
found
failed
meet
burden
evidence
offered
speculative
even
dismissed
randolph
suit
reminded
courts
protect
arbitration
agreements
make
federal
claims
costly
bring
applied
precedents
direct
rule
furthers
purposes
laws
like
sherman
act
faa
statute
reflects
federal
policy
favoring
actual
arbitration
arbitration
streamlined
method
resolving
disputes
foolproof
way
killing
valid
claims
rodriguez
de
quijas
express
put
otherwise
faa
prefers
litigation
arbitration
de
facto
immunity
rule
furthers
statute
goals
ensuring
arbitration
remains
real
faux
method
dispute
resolution
rule
companies
good
reason
adopt
arbitral
procedures
facilitate
efficient
accurate
handling
complaints
without
companies
every
incentive
draft
agreements
extract
backdoor
waivers
statutory
rights
making
arbitration
unavailable
pointless
one
road
arbitration
better
enforcement
federal
statutes
less
arbitration
poorer
enforcement
federal
statutes
prefer
still
aptly
think
congress
answer
becomes
obvious
given
limits
placed
rule
ensure
diminish
arbitration
benefits
rule
comes
play
agreement
operate
prospective
waiver
forecloses
diminishes
plaintiff
opportunity
gain
relief
statutory
violation
mitsubishi
example
randolph
assessed
whether
fees
arbitration
prohibitive
high
excessive
extravagant
moreover
plaintiff
must
make
showing
concrete
proof
peculative
risks
unfounded
assumptions
unsupported
statements
suffice
inquiry
confined
evidentiary
requirements
high
courts
trouble
assessing
matters
rule
makes
relevant
almost
three
decades
courts
followed
edict
arbitration
clauses
must
usually
prevail
declining
enforce
rare
cases
see
brief
amicus
curiae
rule
thus
operated
year
year
without
undermining
much
less
destroy
ing
prospect
speedy
dispute
resolution
arbitration
secures
ante
kind
case
rule
meant
address
italian
colors
noted
alleges
amex
used
market
power
impose
tying
arrangement
violation
sherman
act
antitrust
laws
parties
agree
provide
restaurant
cause
action
give
chance
recover
treble
damages
mean
italian
colors
take
home
problem
looms
case
comes
us
evidence
shows
italian
colors
prevail
arbitration
without
economic
analysis
defining
relevant
markets
establishing
amex
monopoly
power
showing
anticompetitive
effects
measuring
damages
expert
report
cost
several
hundred
thousand
one
million
expense
involved
proving
claim
arbitration
ten
times
italian
colors
hope
gain
even
scenario
counts
prohibitive
cost
randolph
terminology
anything
rational
actor
bring
claim
worth
tens
thousands
dollars
meant
incurring
costs
hundreds
thousands
arbitration
agreement
manage
mismatch
many
ways
amex
disdains
makes
clear
contract
expressly
prohibits
class
arbitration
part
agreement
also
disallows
kind
joinder
consolidation
claims
parties
confidentiality
provision
prevents
italian
colors
informally
arranging
merchants
produce
common
expert
report
still
agreement
precludes
shifting
costs
amex
even
italian
colors
prevails
beyond
amex
refused
enter
stipulations
obviate
mitigate
need
economic
analysis
short
agreement
applied
case
cuts
class
arbitration
avenue
sharing
shifting
shrinking
necessary
costs
amex
put
italian
colors
choice
spend
way
way
way
money
claim
worth
relinquish
sherman
act
rights
contra
majority
got
case
right
italian
colors
proved
plaintiff
randolph
agreement
taken
whole
renders
arbitration
claim
prohibitively
expensive
restaurant
thus
established
contract
operate
prospective
waiver
prevents
effective
vindicat
ion
sherman
act
rights
mitsubishi
follow
precedents
decline
compel
arbitration
ii
majority
quite
sure
rule
apply
precious
little
say
starts
disparaging
rule
originated
dictum
ante
rest
swipe
good
reason
explained
see
supra
rule
began
core
part
mitsubishi
held
federal
statutory
claims
subject
arbitration
long
claimant
effectively
may
vindicate
rights
arbitral
forum
emphasis
added
rule
thus
served
essential
condition
decision
randolph
provided
standard
applying
rule
claimant
alleges
prohibitive
costs
see
supra
applied
standard
parties
us
whatever
else
majority
might
think
rule
dictum
next
paragraph
decision
third
part
iv
key
contains
almost
whole
majority
effort
explain
rule
stop
amex
compelling
arbitration
majority
first
move
describe
mitsubishi
randolph
covering
discrete
situations
rule
majority
asserts
applies
arbitration
agreements
eliminate
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
forbidding
assertion
right
addressed
mitsubishi
imposing
filing
administrative
fees
high
make
access
forum
impracticable
addressed
randolph
ante
emphasis
deleted
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
cases
case
majority
says
agreement
provisions
went
possibility
proving
statutory
ante
distinction
majority
proffers
excludes
problems
proof
one
mitsubishi
randolph
decisions
reaffirming
foreclose
decisions
establish
quarters
known
principle
arbitration
agreement
prevents
effective
vindication
federal
rights
party
may
go
principle
nature
operates
diverse
circumstances
ones
happened
come
see
supra
doubtless
covers
baldly
exculpatory
clause
prohibitive
fees
majority
acknowledges
preclude
arbitration
agreement
enforcement
covers
world
provisions
clever
drafter
might
devise
scuttle
even
meritorious
federal
claims
provisions
might
deny
entry
forum
first
instance
might
deprive
claimant
remedy
might
prevent
claimant
offering
necessary
proof
prevail
economic
testimony
hypothetical
actual
circumstances
case
see
supra
variations
matter
whatever
precise
mechanism
operate
prospective
waiver
party
federal
right
confers
immunity
wrongdoer
mitsubishi
counts
majority
escape
principle
established
observing
one
point
amex
agreement
merely
made
arbitration
worth
expense
ante
suggestion
runs
smack
randolph
likewise
involved
allegation
arbitration
specified
contract
prohibitively
expensive
decision
made
clear
provision
raising
plaintiff
costs
foreclose
consideration
federal
claims
run
afoul
rule
expense
issue
randolph
came
filing
fee
combined
payment
arbitrator
nothing
particular
costs
distinctive
indeed
rule
confined
weirdly
idiosyncratic
surprisingly
randolph
gave
hint
distinguishing
among
different
ways
arbitration
agreement
make
claim
costly
bring
rationale
applies
whenever
agreement
makes
vindication
federal
claims
impossibly
expensive
whether
imposing
fees
proscribing
adopting
device
leaves
three
last
sentences
majority
core
paragraph
majority
conjures
special
reason
exclude
waiver
rule
compass
ante
rule
majority
notes
became
law
decades
sherman
act
majority
conclusion
federal
law
interim
decades
eliminate
plaintiff
rights
act
neither
agreement
notion
first
rests
false
premise
case
waiver
see
ante
confining
case
issue
indeed
sensibly
rule
asks
whether
arbitration
agreement
whole
precludes
claimant
enforcing
federal
statutory
rights
single
provision
properly
viewed
isolation
agreement
close
one
avenue
pursue
claim
leaving
others
open
case
example
agreement
prohibited
class
arbitration
without
offending
rule
provided
alternative
mechanism
share
shift
reduce
necessary
costs
agreement
problem
bars
class
actions
also
mechanisms
many
existing
long
sherman
act
matters
joinder
consolidation
claims
informal
coordination
among
individual
claimants
amelioration
arbitral
expenses
see
supra
contrary
majority
assertion
second
circuit
well
understood
point
considered
example
whether
italian
colors
shift
expert
expenses
amex
claim
prevailed
join
merchants
bringing
similar
claims
produce
common
expert
report
see
case
become
strangely
narrow
majority
stares
single
provision
rather
considering
way
rule
demands
entire
contract
event
age
relevant
procedural
mechanisms
whether
class
actions
matter
rule
asks
world
today
world
might
looked
congress
passed
given
statute
whether
particular
procedural
device
preceded
particular
statute
question
remains
agreement
foreclose
party
right
effectively
vindicating
substantive
rights
statute
provides
case
exhibits
whole
raft
changes
since
congress
passed
sherman
act
affecting
parties
dispute
new
procedural
rules
like
rule
also
new
evidentiary
requirements
like
demand
expert
report
new
contract
provisions
affecting
arbitration
like
agreement
confidentiality
clause
stayed
congress
intent
antitrust
plaintiffs
able
enforce
rights
free
prior
waiver
see
supra
mitsubishi
rule
carries
purpose
ensuring
arbitration
agreement
operating
waiver
unenforceable
requires
courts
determine
rather
ye
olde
glory
days
whether
agreement
provisions
foreclose
even
meritorious
antitrust
claims
still
majority
takes
one
last
stab
truth
tell
claims
mobility
llc
concepcion
resolves
case
ante
decision
majority
recounts
held
faa
preempted
state
law
conditioning
enforcement
arbitration
availability
class
procedure
ibid
see
slip
according
majority
decision
controls
specifically
rejected
argument
class
arbitration
necessary
ante
begin
well
maybe
left
italian
colors
claiming
class
action
necessary
means
vindicating
meritorious
claim
shown
options
abound
see
supra
idea
mobility
controls
depends
entirely
majority
view
case
class
action
bust
majority
drop
pretense
make
claim
mobility
relevance
case
class
actions
mobility
rule
mobility
nowhere
cited
precedents
two
reasons
begin
state
law
question
made
waivers
unenforceable
even
party
feasibly
vindicate
claim
individual
arbitration
state
rule
designed
preserve
deterrent
effects
class
actions
merely
protect
particular
plaintiff
right
assert
claim
slip
indeed
emphasized
complaint
case
unlikely
go
unresolved
agreement
contained
host
features
ensuring
aggrieved
customers
filed
claims
essentially
guaranteed
made
whole
slip
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
professed
mobility
implicate
thing
party
ability
vindicate
meritorious
claim
case
involves
enough
mobility
involved
state
law
therefore
possibly
implicate
rule
state
rule
allegedly
conflicts
faa
apply
standard
preemption
principles
asking
whether
state
law
frustrates
faa
purposes
objectives
state
rule
found
mobility
supremacy
clause
requires
invalidation
earthly
interest
quite
contrary
vindicating
law
rule
comes
play
faa
alleged
conflict
another
federal
law
like
sherman
act
context
one
law
automatically
bow
rule
serves
way
reconcile
tension
mobility
occasion
address
issue
case
relevant
decisions
instead
mitsubishi
randolph
today
mistakes
case
hammer
everything
looks
like
nail
bent
diminishing
usefulness
rule
everything
looks
like
class
action
ready
dismantled
consider
amex
agreement
bars
class
actions
forms
provide
effective
vindication
ante
short
consider
decide
italian
colors
similarly
situated
litigants
actual
argument
rule
precludes
agreement
enforcement
result
amex
contract
succeed
depriving
italian
colors
effective
opportunity
challenge
monopolistic
conduct
allegedly
violation
sherman
act
faa
majority
says
requires
fooled
requires
faa
never
meant
produce
outcome
faa
conceived
arbitration
method
resolving
disputes
way
using
tailored
streamlined
procedures
facilitate
redress
injuries
rodriguez
de
quijas
emphasis
added
hands
today
majority
arbitration
threatens
become
nearly
opposite
mechanism
easily
made
block
vindication
meritorious
federal
claims
insulate
wrongdoers
liability
thus
undermines
faa
less
sherman
act
federal
statutes
providing
rights
action
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
charge
card
requires
holder
pay
full
outstanding
balance
end
billing
cycle
credit
card
requires
payment
portion
balance
subject
interest
contrary
dissent
claim
post
opinion
kagan
mitsubishi
motors
hold
federal
statutory
claims
subject
arbitration
long
claimant
may
effectively
vindicate
rights
arbitral
forum
expressly
stated
stage
proceedings
occasion
speculate
whether
arbitration
agreement
potential
deprivation
claimant
right
pursue
federal
remedies
may
render
agreement
unenforceable
even
appeals
case
recognized
relevant
language
mitsubishi
motors
dicta
american
express
merchants
litigation
dissent
contends
waiver
may
deny
party
right
pursue
statutory
remedies
way
clause
bars
party
presenting
economic
testimony
see
post
false
comparison
several
reasons
begin
given
clause
constitute
impermissible
waiver
never
considered
point
importantly
clause
assuming
makes
vindication
claim
impossible
makes
impossible
class
action
even
individual
claim
disagree
dissent
assertion
rule
asks
world
today
world
might
looked
congress
passed
given
statute
post
time
change
meaning
effectiveness
making
ineffective
vindication
today
effective
vindication
past
dissent
also
says
agreement
bars
forms
cost
sharing
existing
sherman
act
provide
effective
vindication
see
post
petitioners
denied
appeals
decision
review
held
held
forms
cost
sharing
economically
feasible
economically
feasible
means
enforcing
respondents
statutory
rights
via
class
action
waiver
unenforceable
emphasis
added
dissent
assertion
contrary
cites
opinion
appeal
earlier
opinion
vacated
see
american
express
merchants
litigation
vacated
remanded
conclusion
reject
dismissing
mobility
case
involving
exception
dissent
ignores
case
established
faa
command
enforce
arbitration
agreements
trumps
interest
ensuring
prosecution
claims
latter
interest
said
unrelated
faa
slip
accordingly
faa
contrary
dissent
assertion
see
post
favor
absence
litigation
consequence
waiver
since
enforcement
arbitration
agreements
according
terms
slip
quoting
volt
information
sciences
board
trustees
leland
stanford
junior
footnotes
evidence
relating
costs
comes
affidavit
submitted
economist
experienced
proving
similar
antitrust
claims
second
circuit
found
amex
ha
brought
serious
challenge
factual
showing
see
amex
conceded
italian
colors
need
expert
economic
report
prevail
arbitration
see
tr
oral
arg
perhaps
really
true
hallmark
arbitration
use
procedures
tailored
type
dispute
amount
controversy
arbitrators
might
properly
decline
demand
rigorous
evidentiary
showing
small
antitrust
cases
possibility
disturb
factual
premise
case
comes
us
majority
accepts
italian
colors
tying
claim
ordinary
kind
antitrust
claim
worth
tenth
cost
arbitration
majority
contends
waiver
part
consider
see
ante
explain
assertion
wrong
see
infra
majority
dead
wrong
says
mitsubishi
reserved
judgment
whether
arbitration
agreement
potential
deprivation
claimant
right
pursue
federal
remedies
may
render
agreement
unenforceable
ante
mitsubishi
occasion
speculate
whether
particular
agreement
fact
eliminated
claimant
federal
rights
stated
expressly
agreement
amex
invalidate
ibid
see
supra
gilmer
vimar
seguros
majority
relies
see
ante
fail
advance
argument
plaintiffs
claim
italian
colors
arbitration
clause
altogether
precluded
vindicating
federal
rights
averred
arbitration
less
convenient
effective
proceeding
see
gilmer
lane
vimar
seguros
reaseguros
sky
reefer
explained
kind
showing
meet
rule
high
bar
see
supra
defense
focus
majority
quotes
second
circuit
concluding
economically
feasible
means
italian
colors
enforce
statutory
rights
via
class
action
ante
quoting
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
emphasis
added
appeals
reached
conclusion
finding
agreement
prohibited
forms
see
opinion
vacated
grounds
analysis
continued
inform
indeed
essential
second
circuit
final
decision
case
see
second
circuit
therefore
exactly
majority
refuses
look
agreement
whole
determine
whether
permits
vindication
federal
rights