Vietnamese Fishermen's Ass'n v. Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (1981)

You may skim the opinion in this case; note the creative uses of causes of action. Consider how far these plaintiffs have come since the 1874 case of Wing Chung v. Los Angeles in using the law for their protection. 

John Mark Newman, in Racist antitrust, antiracist antitrust, 66 The Antitrust Bulletin 384–395 (2021) notes:

"The antitrust analysis [of Vietnamese Fishermen's Ass'n] is notable for its clarity and brevity—indeed, to the contemporary observer, it is perhaps most remarkable for what it does not say. Although Judge McDonald began by stating that “the anti-trust laws” forbid a “lessening of competitive conditions in the relevant market,” she went on to explain that plaintiffs could prove such a “lessening” by demonstrating an actual marketplace effect. No formal market definition was required. Nor did the opinion engage in a protracted attempt to fit the defendants’ conduct into a particular analytical category before deciding on the appropriate legal treatment. Again, proof of actual harmful effects was sufficient, at least to receive a preliminary injunction. In August, the court made the injunction permanent and ordered it to be posted publicly in the Gulf Coast area."