It has been argued that the laws that prohibited branch banking were needed to protect consumers from large monopoly banks. Does that argument hold up to close scrutiny? Explain.

What will be an ideal response?

Actually, the laws may have created more monopoly power. Often small banks were protected from competition in the form of more efficient large banks. The barriers to entry that the anti-branching laws created resulted in a system of small, geographically fragmented banks that faced virtually no competition.