The Birth of the Antitrust Exemption
Stuart Banner
Abstract
Stuart Banner
Abstract
Abstract This chapter focuses on the origins of baseball's so-called “antitrust exemption.” It first examines the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the 1922 case Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. National League, in which it decided that the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 did not apply to professional baseball on the ground that baseball was not a form of interstate commerce. It then looks at other Supreme Court cases that tested baseball's immunity from federal antitrust law, including the Toolson v. New York Yankees (1953), the antitrust suit filed against a group of vaudeville theaters, and baseball player Danny Gardella's antitrust suit against organized baseball stemming from his decision to play in the Mexican League.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract This chapter focuses on the origins of baseball's so-called “antitrust exemption.” It first examines the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the 1922 case Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. National League, in which it decided that the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 did not apply to professional baseball on the ground that baseball was not a form of interstate commerce. It then looks at other Supreme Court cases that tested baseball's immunity from federal antitrust law, including the Toolson v. New York Yankees (1953), the antitrust suit filed against a group of vaudeville theaters, and baseball player Danny Gardella's antitrust suit against organized baseball stemming from his decision to play in the Mexican League.
Key concepts: Business, Law, Political science