Which of the following practices is NOT considered a per se violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act?

The correct answer is redlining because it does not fall under the specific categories of practices that are automatically (per se) deemed illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Price fixing, group boycotts, and tying arrangements all represent clear examples of conduct that is inherently anti-competitive and are thus classified as per se violations. Price fixing involves agreements between competitors to set prices at a certain level, which restricts free-market competition. Group boycotts occur when two or more businesses agree to refuse to deal with a particular competitor, stifling competition and harming consumers. Tying arrangements involve conditioning the sale of one product on the purchase of another, creating unfair advantages for the seller and limiting consumer choice.

Redlining, on the other hand, typically refers to the practice of denying services, typically financial, to residents of certain areas based on racial or ethnic demographics rather than on legitimate business criteria. While it has serious legal implications, particularly under civil rights laws, it is not classified as a per se violation under the Sherman Antitrust Act. Instead, it might be examined under different legal frameworks concerning discrimination and fair housing laws. This highlights the importance of understanding the specific legal categories and the contexts in which they operate.