On November 1, the Texas Rangers dominated the Arizona Diamondbacks to win the 2023 World Series in a 4-1 victory. While the season ends in celebration for one franchise, antitrust litigation is warming up against the laws governing Major League Baseball (MLB).  

Since 1922, the MLB has been protected from antitrust scrutiny. In Fed. Baseball Club v. Nat’l League of Pro. Baseball Clubs, the United States Supreme Court ruled that baseball was a “purely state affair” and was not subject to the Sherman Antitrust Act. [1] The 1922 decision was upheld in 1953 because the sport was still not considered interstate commerce. [2] In 1972, the Court reaffirmed and held that Congress should determine whether to remove the exemption. [3] Congress partially limited the MLB’s antitrust immunity in 1998 by allowing MLB players to file antitrust claims against the MLB through the Curt Flood Act. [4] However, this act explicitly limited its scope to prevent other types of antitrust claims from arising.

There is a strong push to strike out the MLB’s antitrust exemption once more. In September, two minor league baseball teams asked the Court to revisit and remove the MLB’s antitrust immunity after it cut affiliations with 40 minor league teams in 2020. [5] Days before the 2023 World Series, a bipartisan state coalition of 18 attorneys general went up to bat for the two teams by filing a brief with the Court. [6] No other professional sports league is awarded the same exemption the MLB currently receives. [7]

While the courts have loyally adhered to the 1922 decision, there is mounting pressure for the Court to overturn its century-long precedent. After the NCAA v. Alston decision in 2021 which held the NCAA in violation of antitrust law, there is hope that the Court will rule against the MLB and in favor of antitrust enforcement. [8] Only time will tell if the Court grants certiorari to hear the case and levels the playing field by modernizing the laws of baseball to reflect its status as a national sports league participating in interstate commerce.

References

[1] Fed. Baseball Club v. Nat’l League of Pro. Baseball Clubs, 259 U.S. 200, 208 (1922).

[2] Karen M. Lent & Anthony J. Dreyer, The Current State of Major League Baseball’s Antitrust Exemption, Reuters (July 20, 2023, 10:43AM),  https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/current-state-major-league-baseballs-antitrust-exemption-2023-07-20/#:~:text=Later%20Supreme%20Court%20rulings%20on,New%20York%20Yankees%2C%20Inc

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Petition for Writ of Certiorari at 5, Tri-City ValleyCats Inc. v. Office of the Comm’r of Baseball, No. 23-283 (U.S. Sept. 18, 2023). https://www.weil.com/-/media/files/pdfs/2023/september/final-mlb-cert-petition.pdf

[6] Brief for The State of Connecticut et al. as Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners at 1, Tri-City ValleyCats Inc. v. Office of the Comm’r of Baseball, No. 23-283 (U.S. Oct. 23, 2023). https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/TriCityValleyCatsIncetalPetitionersvsTheOfficeoftheCommissionerof/3?doc_id=X71J23CT9CT9G39AN1NBEN752MK

[7] Katie Arcieri, Lawmakers, AGs Urge High Court to End MLB Antitrust Immunity (3), Bloomberg Law (Oct. 23, 2023, 2:00 PM), https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/us-lawmakers-join-push-to-eliminate-mlb-antitrust-exemption.

[8] Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Alston, 594 U.S. ___, 141 S.Ct. 2141, 2147 (2021).

Lindsay Twedt

Charleston School of Law
Juris Doctor Candidate, December 2024
Staff Editor, Charleston Law Review
Research Fellow, Sol Blatt Jr. Law Library