Showing posts with label antitrust exemption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label antitrust exemption. Show all posts

Friday, August 9, 2013

Challenging Major League Baseball's antitrust exemption: San Jose v. MLB.

Elsewhere, I discussed baseball's antitrust exemption:

- Why does Major League Baseball have an antitrust exemption?
- More on the antitrust exemption in baseball.
- An antitrust lawsuit against Minor League Baseball.

This is a good piece on a current lawsuit between the City of San Jose, California, and Major League Baseball. The City is challenging MLB's antitrust exemption, because it wants the MLB's Oakland Athletics to move to San Jose. MLB argues that stare decisis -- prior precedent or the status quo -- prevents the City from challenging the antitrust exemption. MLB also argues that the City does not have antitrust standing to bring suit, and allowing the City to do so would open the door for any city that wants a major league team to sue any major league organization.

Ultimately, more facts are needed to determine the merits of the City's case. Baseball's antitrust exemption will be overturned at some point in the future, but it is too early to tell if this is that point.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Why does Major League Baseball have an antitrust exemption?

Unlike other professional sports organizations, Major League Baseball (MLB) benefited from an antitrust exemption throughout the 1900s. The exemption has been curtailed in recent years, and likely will be completely eliminated in the next several decades. The exemption comes from a 1922 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. The 1922 decision stated that MLB was not subject to antitrust law, because it was a game and not interstate commerce.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, National League (NL) baseball owners benefited from a "reserve clause," in which players could be sold and traded, but were not able to sign with other teams of their own volition. Basically, if an owner wanted to keep a player for his entire career, the player had no say in the matter. Players lamented the practice in those days, well over half a century before full-fledged free agency began. When the American League (AL) and NL combined in 1903, the newly formed MLB adopted the reserve clause.

Federal courts expanded regulation of interstate commerce throughout the 1900s, but baseball remained largely exempt from antitrust law. On two occasions, in 1953 and 1972, the Supreme Court heard arguments attacking the antitrust exemption. The court followed precedent from the 1922 decision (stare decisis), even though the court viewed the 1922 reasoning as spurious.

About three years after the 1972 decision, players were able to eliminate the reserve clause through collective bargaining, which paved the way for free agency. Following the baseball strike of 1994, the antitrust exemption was repealed in part, when it came to labor matters. But baseball remains exempt from antitrust law in regard to a few matters. For one, minor league players are tied to the MLB franchise that signed them much like players were under the reserve clause.