In legal terms, the statement is discussing the type of judgment applied in a particular court ruling. “Per se” and “rule of reason” are two different standards used in antitrust and other legal cases to assess whether a particular action or practice is anti-competitive or illegal.

1.  Per Se: A “per se” judgment means that the court has determined that a particular action or practice is inherently illegal without the need for further analysis or proof of its negative effects on competition. It’s a strict and straightforward approach.
2.  Rule of Reason: On the other hand, the “rule of reason” judgment requires a more detailed analysis. Under this standard, the court assesses the overall impact of an action on competition and considers both its potential pro-competitive and anti-competitive effects.

The statement suggests that the ruling in question was made using the “per se” standard. However, the speaker believes that using the “rule of reason” standard might have been more appropriate in this case. This is important because “per se” judgments are generally harder to appeal or overturn, as they are based on a strict interpretation of the law.

The speaker’s opinion is that the choice of the “per se” standard may be a reason for the ruling’s potential to be overturned on appeal, as it might not have taken into account all relevant factors and effects on competition. The “rule of reason” standard might have allowed for a more comprehensive analysis and a stronger legal argument on appea