[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 106 (Friday, July 31, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S9621]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S9621]]
                         CURT FLOOD ACT OF 1998

 Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, late last night, the Senate 
passed by unanimous consent S. 53. I have been contacted by the 
Attorney General of my State, Hubert H. Humphrey III, and asked to try 
to clarify a technical legal point about the effect of this 
legislation. The State of Minnesota, through the office of Attorney 
General, and the Minnesota Twins are currently involved in an 
antitrust-related investigation. It is my understanding that S. 53 will 
have no impact on this investigation or any litigation arising out of 
the investigation.
  Mr. HATCH. That is correct. The bill simply makes it clear that major 
league baseball players have the same rights under the antitrust laws 
as do other professional athletes. The bill does not change current law 
in any other context or with respect to any other person or entity.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Thank you for that clarification. I also note that 
several lower courts have recently found that baseball currently enjoys 
only a narrow exemption from antitrust laws and that this exemption 
applies only to the reserve system. For example, the Florida Supreme 
Court in Butterworth v. National League, 644 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 1994), 
the U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania in Piazza v. Major League 
Baseball, 831 F. Supp. 420 (E.D. Pa. 1993) and a Minnesota State court 
in a case involving the Twins have all held the baseball exemption from 
antitrust laws is now limited only to the reserve system. It is my 
understanding that S. 53 will have no effect on the courts' ultimate 
resolution of the scope of the antitrust exemption on matters beyond 
those related to owner-player relations at the major league level.
  Mr. HATCH. That is correct. S. 53 is intended to have no effect other 
than to clarify the status of major league players under the antitrust 
laws. With regard to all other context or other persons or entities, 
the law will be the same after passage of the Act as it is today.
  Mr. LEAHY. I concur with the statement of the Chairman of the 
Committee. The bill affects no pending or decided cases except to the 
extent that courts have exempted major league baseball clubs from the 
antitrust laws in their dealings with major league players. In fact, 
Section 3 of the legislation makes clear that the law is unchanged with 
regard to issues such as relocation. The bill has no impact on the 
recent decisions in federal and state courts in Florida, Pennsylvania 
and Minnesota concerning baseball's status under the antitrust laws.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Senator. I call to my colleagues attention 
the decision in Minnesota Twins v. State by Humphrey, No. 62-CX-98-568 
(Minn. dist. Court, 2d Judicial dist., Ramsey County April 20, 1998) 
reprinted in 1998-1 Trade Cases (CCH) para.72,136.

                          ____________________