The Fourth Circuit holds that «when a state agency is operated by market participants who are
elected by other market participants, it is a «private» actor,» and therefore must be actively supervised by other state
officials to receive state action immunity (while also stating that its «opinion should not be read as precluding» an otherwise undefined category
of «more quintessential state agencies,» not «
composed entirely
of private market participants,» from «arguing that they need not satisfy the active supervision requirement»).