Abstract
This article addresses the historical anomaly of baseball’s exemption from the federal antitrust laws. Starting with Justice Holmes’ opinion in the 1922 Federal Baseball case, the article criticizes the Supreme Court’s rigid adherence to stare decisis despite considerable changes in the legal and economic context. Ultimately, in the Curt Flood case the Court acknowledges the error of its previous ways, but stubbornly refuses to correct the law, leaving to Congress the ultimate power to revise a half century of judicial errors.
Keywords
Justice Holmes, stare decisis, Curt Flood, Supreme Court, Congress
Subject Categories
Baseball, Antitrust law
Disciplines
Entertainment and Sports Law | Law
Publisher
Marquette University Law School
Publication Date
Spring 1999
Rights Information
Marquette University Law School retains copyright.
Rights Holder
Marquette University Law School
Permanent URL
http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002351
Recommended Citation
Originally published in Marquette Sports Law Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 307-313, Spring 1999.
Click button above to open, or right-click to save.
Notes
Originally published in Marquette Sports Law Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 307-313, Spring 1999. Marquette University Law School retains copyright.