O
n Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review an appeal filed by Real Estate Exchange Inc. (REX). The brokerage had sued Zillow and the National Association of Realtors (NAR), alleging that the two entities conspired to suppress competition in the home‑listing arena. REX’s case hinged on NAR’s “no‑commingling” rule, which allows MLS‑affiliated platforms to separate their listings from those of independent brokers. The firm claimed the rule narrowed consumer choice and made its own listings less visible. It also accused Zillow of misleading users by placing MLS listings in a tab, giving NAR members an advantage. The lower court had dismissed the claim, finding no evidence of collusion. Zillow welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision, stating it reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, innovation, and consumer priority. NAR said the policy was optional, has been discontinued, and does not violate antitrust law. Court filings show individual MLSs chose whether to adopt the rule. With the Supreme Court declining to take the case, the dismissal stands, effectively ending REX’s legal challenge.