Hermès Birkin Antitrust Lawsuit Dismissed and What It Means for Collectors

A U.S. District Court judge in San Francisco has dismissed the much-watched class-action lawsuit against Hermès, which accused the maison of running a “hidden lottery” around its legendary Birkin bag.

The Lawsuit Itself

The lawsuit was brought by three U.S. consumers: Tina Cavalleri, Mark Glinoga, and Mengyao Yang. Originally filed in March 2024, the suit argued that customers were being forced to buy other ancillary Hermès products—scarves, belts, even homewares—to be considered eligible for the chance to buy a Birkin. 

The lawsuit was brought forward as an antitrust violation, specifically with claims under the Sherman Act and California antitrust/unfair competition laws. The plaintiffs argued that the “tying” (i.e. conditioning sale of one product on purchase of another) is unlawful, if product markets, monopoly power, and anticompetitive harm are sufficiently alleged. The original complaint stated: “The nominal retail price of a Birkin bag is a facade, masking a hidden lottery system that forces consumers to purchase substantial amounts of Hermès ancillary products to ‘qualify’ for the mere opportunity to buy a Birkin.”

Hermès responded by challenging the legal sufficiency of the allegations: they argued that the plaintiffs failed to define the relevant market(s), did not show a monopoly or market power that would violate antitrust law, and that prioritizing “high-paying customers” is not itself illegal. Hermès also stated that customers without a substantial purchase history can still buy a Birkin (i.e. it’s not mandatory to buy ancillary products), countering the tying allegation.

The Ultimate Verdict: Case Dismissed

Ultimately the court disagreed with the plaintiffs' case, saying that Hermès' system of rewarding top spenders and loyal clients doesn’t break U.S. antitrust laws. Judge Donato wrote “It may be, as plaintiffs suggest, that Hermès reserves the Birkin bag for its highest-paying customers, but that in itself is not an antitrust violation.”

This case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that this case cannot be refiled.

Why This Matters to Collectors and Shoppers

The Birkin’s allure has always been about more than leather and craftsmanship—it’s about access. The dismissal effectively reaffirms Hermès’ right to keep supply selective, which means scarcity will continue to drive desirability and value. This type of "unspoken reward" for top customers isn't new, as it's also seen amongst certain watch and car brands. For enthusiasts, this signals that resale premiums on Birkins are unlikely to soften any time soon.

The “Nepo Lottery” Debate

While some critics see the practice as unfair gatekeeping that only grants the ultra-rich access to these luxury bags, while others view it as the very essence of luxury. For serious collectors, the Birkin isn’t simply a bag—it’s proof of status, patience, and relationship-building. For those unwilling to play the boutique game, the resale market remains the most reliable path to ownership, albeit at a premium price.

What to Watch Next

• Pricing trends: Hermès raised U.S. prices earlier this year; more increases may follow. These increased prices will almost certainly materialize on the secondhand luxury market as well. 

• Market activity: Rare colors, popular neutrals, and exotic skins continue to command record resale prices. Will buyers be willing to pay the premiums? Or will sales slow down?

• Cultural impact: The lawsuit has already sparked wider conversations about fairness, exclusivity, and the meaning of luxury in 2025. Will more lawsuits be brought forward against other top luxury brands? Only time will tell.

For collectors, the message is clear: Birkins remain one of the few accessories where scarcity is as central to the story and appeal as the design itself.