About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

90 Tul. L. Rev. 859 (2015-2016)

handle is hein.journals/tulr90 and id is 909 raw text is: 






  The Curiously Confounding Curt FlOod Act

                            Nathaniel Grow*


      This Ar'le provides a novel textuabst inteipretation of the Curt Flood Act of 1998, a
relatively little-known statutory provision that parially repealed professional baseballk
contrvversiul,ju'cillycreatedantiust exemption in only a single, limited respect. Aside from
allowing major league baseball players to file antitrst lawsuits against Major League Baseball,
the Flood Act was intended to remain neutal regarding the continued itality and scope of
baseballk exemption in all other respects, as Congress went to great lengths to emphasize
throughout the legslative process.
      Despite these clear expressions of congressional inten4 however, most subsequent courts
and commentators have surpzisingl interpreted the FloodAct quite c ierently, concluding that
it in lfct either expressly or implicitly endorsed broad antibust immunity for professional
baseball based on a single, imprecise passage in the statute. The implication of these analyses is
that the judiciarynow lacks the power to modfy or repeal baseball-antitustimmuni with the
exempt'on insteadhaving effectively been codified by Congress.
      Tlus Article contends that future courts should reject the majoii interpretation of the
Flood Act and instead construe the statute neutrally in most rspects, as Congress intended
While other commentators have previouslv aigued that the FloodAct should be readnarrowly in
light of its legislative histor, this Article advances a novel textuaist interpretation of the Flood
Act. In particular, it asserts that when properly rea4 the Flood Act neither codfies baseballk
antitiust exemption nor reflects congressional acquiescence in most aspects of the sportk
immunity Therefore, the Article concludes that the judiciary retains the power to reconsider
baseballk antitrustsatus should a future court wish to do so.


I.    INTRODUCTION     ............................................................................. 860
II. BASEBALL' S ANTITRUST EXEMPTION: A BRIEF
      HISTORICAL OVERVIEW       ............................................................... 864
      A.    The Supreme Court       Baseball Tulogy ............................. 865
      B.    Lower Court Decisions Post-Flood ................................... 869
IH.   THE FLOOD ACT'S ORIGINS AND LEGISLATiVE HISTORY ............ 872
      A.    The Oigins of the CFA ...................................................... 873
      B.    The CFA $Legislative History ........................................... 879
IN THE FLOOD ACT DID NOT CODIFY BASEBALL'S
      ANTITRUST EXEMPTION ............................................................... 889
V     THE FLOOD ACT DOES NOT REFLECT CONGRESSIONAL
      ACQUIESCENCE IN A BROAD ANTITRUST EXEMPTION FOR
      PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL ........................................................... 894
V I.  C ONCLUSION    ................................................................................ 900



    *     © 2016 Nathaniel Grow. Associate Professor of Legal Studies, Terry College of
Business, University of Georgia.
                                     859

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most