Re: it was a court, and a pretty comprehensive trashing it was, too.
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2
It's flat out wrong to say the act was to protect consumers. The language clearly demarcates it is about not restraining trade. Apple did NOT restrain trade. Any publisher who gained a cost saving edge was free to cut prices to suppliers. The MFN clause does NOT prohibit that. It just says you the business can't charge Apple more as a means of generating the monies which allow a competitor better pricing. In effect, the MFN clause is Sherman Anti-trust Act language included in the legally binding contract between the two companies.
What the trusts did that caused the law to be passed was to create monopolies which allowed them to set prices at will. At this point in time, Amazon is the Standard Oil of online direct sales. Their behavior as cited is precisely price setting behavior, and worse it is not simply price setting behavior on something they produce, but on the producers of something they sell.
This is plain and clear for anyone who actually reads the law for the sake of the law instead of promoting a personal vendetta.