In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that antitrust claims were too complex and important to be left to arbitrators, and expressed incredulousness that his colleagues would require an American company to arbitrate a claim under American antitrust law before a panel of foreign arbitrators.
Antitrust claims were too complex and important to be left to arbitrators. This was what Justice John Paul Stevens argued in dissent. His colleagues would require an American company. This is to arbitrate a claim under American antitrust law before a panel of foreign arbitrators. This was what Justice John Paul Stevens expressed incredulousness in dissent.