This epilogue explores issues arising from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s opinion in Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore, Inc. v. National League. It begins with a discussion of criticisms against the decision, including the notion that Holmes simply does not consider the business of professional baseball to be sufficiently interstate in nature to fall within the ambit of the Sherman Antitrust Act. It then offers arguments supporting Holmes, first by insisting that at the time he wrote the opinion it actually “represented a fairly orthodox application of then prevalent constitutional doctrine.” This is followed by an analysis of several mistakes made by the Baltimore Federals's legal counsel in the suit. The epilogue also looks at two other cases in which the Court has affirmed Federal Baseball: Toolson v. New York Yankees in 1953 and Flood v. Kuhn in 1972. Finally, it comments on recent attempts to limit the scope of baseball's antitrust exemption to just the reserve clause, contending that they are contrary to the actual history of the Federal Baseball case.
Illinois Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.