Publications

Major League Baseball is Exempt From the Antitrust Laws — Like it or Not

6/2/2015 Articles

Originally published in Competition - The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California  Vol. 24, No. 1 (Spring 2015).

Major League Baseball is Exempt From the
Antitrust Laws — Like it or Not:
The “unrealistic,” “inconsistent,” and “illogical” antitrust
exemption for baseball that just won’t go away.
By John L. Cooper and Racheal Turner

The Athletics baseball team has been located in Oakland, California for many years.  Several years ago, the A’s decided they would like to move their franchise to San Jose, which they anticipate would be a more profitable location.  San Jose responded that it would also like to have the A’s relocate to their city.  In 2009, the A’s asked Major League Baseball (MLB) for permission to move its franchise from Oakland to San Jose, but the league essentially shelved the request by sending it to a committee.  San Jose then sued MLB, claiming that the refusal of its relocation request was an agreement among MLB team owners to preserve the San Francisco Giants’ monopoly in violation of the federal and state antitrust laws.

On October 11, 2013, Judge Ronald Whyte of the Northern District of California ruled that under longstanding United States Supreme Court precedent, “MLB’s alleged interference with the A’s relocation to San Jose is exempt from antitrust regulation.”[1]  San Jose appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the Court should overrule MLB’s historic exemption from the antitrust laws, which the Supreme Court itself has acknowledged may be described as “unrealistic, inconsistent, [and] illogical.”[2]  On January 15, 2015 Judge Alex Kozinski issued the opinion of the Court affirming the District Court’s decision and refusing to limit or overturn baseball’s antitrust exemption.[3]

Baseball is the only national sport that is exempt from the antitrust laws.  That anomalous exemption has existed for 92 years and withstood numerous court and Congressional challenges.  So how did the judicially-created baseball antitrust exemption—which is widely acknowledged to be bad law—become the law-of-the-land? This exemption is a study in how judicial and legislative events transpire to freeze into the law a rule that is not only “illogical” but if considered afresh on a clean slate would never exist.  As will be discussed in more detail below, the exemption was created in 1922 when the Supreme Court first held that baseball was not subject to the federal antitrust laws because it was not involved in interstate commerce.  Over the years, the federal courts and the public adopted the view, without supporting legal analysis, that baseball was generally exempt from the antitrust laws, regardless of whether it was engaged in interstate commerce.  Since 1953, the Supreme Court has considered this issue several

times and explicitly refused to overturn baseball’s exemption from federal antitrust laws on the grounds that Congress has not seen fit to do so, stating repeatedly that baseball’s exemption can only be altered through legislation.  Then, in 1998, Congress set baseball’s antitrust exemption in stone by passing the Curt Flood Act, which revoked baseball’s antitrust exemption with respect to employment issues, but explicitly maintained it for all other issues.  Stated differently, Congress affirmatively carved out employment issues from baseball’s antitrust exemption, but otherwise left “the business of baseball” exempt from federal antitrust laws.

Because of the Supreme Court’s insistence that any change to baseball’s antitrust exemption had to come from Congress, and because Congress expressly declined to make any change except with respect to employment issues, the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, must now defer to Congress’s determination that baseball should continue to be exempt from antitrust laws.  Regardless of how criticized it may be, if this exemption is to be changed, Congress will have to do the changing.

Read the full article: Major League Baseball is Exempt From the Antitrust Laws — Like it or Not



[1] City of San Jose v. Office of the Comm’r of Baseball (San Jose v. MLB (Dist. Ct.)), No. C-13-02787 RMW, 2013 WL 5609346, at *11 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 11, 2013).

[2] See Radovich v. Nat’l Football League, 352 U.S. 445, 451-52 (1957).

[3] See City of San Jose v. Office of the Comm’r of Baseball (San Jose v. MLB (9th Cir.)), No. 14-15139, 2015 WL 178358 (9th Cir. Jan. 15, 2015).

Resources

Firm Highlights

News

JIOP Alumni Spotlight: Kelly Matayoshi

Kelly Matayoshi discusses how the Judicial Intern Opportunity Program helped her career and what she'd say to students undecided about applying for an internship. Read the interview here .

Read More
Event

Women in Cleantech & Sustainability

Lysondra Ludwig will speak at the WCS Talks - a full day TED-Style event and startup pitch competition hosted by Google.

Read More
Event

Complex Civil Litigation Symposium

Doug Dexter is a member of the planning committee for the 2019 Complex Civil Litigation Symposium.

Read More
Publication

What California’s New Security Law Means to Your Business

Commonsense IoT security steps that startups and small business should consider to comply with California’s new law California recently enacted a new law, Senate Bill 327, that requires companies that make Internet of Things...

Read More
Publication

Are You Background Checking Your Contractors? If So, Exercise Caution.

Employers who use background checks in their hiring processes are likely aware of the various requirements under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and analogous state statutes. They must provide clear disclosures and obtain...

Read More
Publication

Nonprofits and the California Consumer Privacy Act

The new California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) will come into effect January 1, 2020. In most situations, nonprofits won’t be subject to the law—but in some cases they necessarily will be and/or...

Read More
Event

Bay Area Opportunity Zones 2.0

On the heels of recently released regulation by the US government, we dive back into the state of OZs in the Bay Area. What You'll Learn What are the most important takeaways from the...

Read More
News

The Legal 500 United States 2019 Recognizes Farella Braun + Martel Practices & Attorneys

The 2019 edition of Legal 500 United States recognized Farella Braun + Martel among the top firms in the Construction, Land Use/Zoning, and Not-for-Profit practice areas. Recognized attorneys include: Construction Adam Dawson CJ Higley...

Read More
News

Lysondra Ludwig Selected to Leadership San Francisco

Read More
Publication

Accessory Dwelling Units Authorized in New Construction

New legislation passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on June 18 now authorizes the addition of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in new construction projects for single-family homes and multi-family buildings. The City...

Read More