“I am pleased God made my skin black, but I wish He had made it

thicker.”
–Curt Flood

The request seemed simple enough. He wanted to work where

he wanted and for whom he wanted and be paid a wage he had

earned. By both his peers and acclimation in the media he was thought

to be among the best at what he did. If only it really were that simple.

But Curt Flood did not have an ordinary job in an ordinary time.

He was a black baseball player in the late 1960’s. The rules in all of

society were being challenged. On October 8, 1969, Flood was traded

by the St. Louis Cardinals, his employer of 12 years, to the Philadelphia

Phillies.1 For as long as baseball had been America’s past time players

were traded from one team to another, but Flood felt that he deserved

better than being treated “like a piece of property.”2 Specifically, he felt

it was time to challenge baseball’s hallowed Reserve Clause.3

The Reserve Clause was part of the standard player’s contract

that baseball owners had with all players. The standard player’s

contract dates back, in its original form, to the late 1870s. It was

around this time that baseball owners realized the value of players to

their respective franchises. It was in their best interest to keep their

1
Lomax, Michael E. (2004). Curt Flood Stood Up for Us: The Quest to Break Down Racial Barriers and
Structural Inequality in Major League Baseball. Culture, Sport and Society. 6 (2-3) 44-70.
2
Snyder, Brad. (2006). A Well-Paid Slave: Curt Flood’s Fight for Free Agency in Professional Sports. New
York: Viking Penguin.
3
Flood, Curt & Carter, Richard. (1971). The Way It Is. New York: Trident Press.
 2

best players perpetually employed if only for the sake of keeping the

teams’ value as a business enterprise.4

During the later years of the nineteenth century several baseball

leagues were in existence with varying degrees of profitability. They

were effectively in competition with each other for both fans and for

players. The only league still in existence from this time period is the

National League, which was formed in 1876 and continues to the

present day.5

In 1890, the United States Congress passed the Sherman

Antitrust Act.6 The Sherman Act, as it became known, was meant to

promote competition and prevent monopolies among companies within

an industry—specifically the oil and railroad industries that were both

dominated by a few companies.7 Professional baseball was thought to

be neither large enough nor profitable enough to be among the

industries that the Sherman Act might affect. That would change

shortly after the start of the 20th century.

Regulators began enforcing the Sherman Act, and its power was

confirmed in 1910 when the Supreme Court ordered the powerful

4
Balfour, Alan & Porter, Philip K. 1991. The Reserve Clause in Professional Sports: Legality and Effect on
Competitive Balance. Labor Law Journal. January 1991. 8-18.
5
Balfour & Porter 8.
6
Sherman Antitrust Act, ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209, 15 U.S.C. § 1–7 (1890)
7
Ibid.
 3

Standard Oil Company to be dissolved because it was essentially

monopolizing the oil industry.8

From a player’s a point of view, the Reserve Clause essentially

meant that the player was beholden forever to the team that initially

signed him to a contract. The player could only change teams if he was

traded, sold or released from his contract by the team.9

If the term “sold” sounds harsh with respect to the services of a

human being consider that perhaps the Boston Red Sox sold perhaps

the greatest player in history—Babe Ruth—to the New York Yankees in

1918 for $100,000.10

Ruth, like every other player, had no freedom of movement. But

the Reserve Clause affected every player, not just the superstars. The

only way a player’s value, meaning his salary, increased was through

excellence on the playing field. So, what if a very good player but had

the misfortune to play behind an even better player? He might never

have a chance to take the field and demonstrate his talents.

The classic example of a player taking advantage of his one, and

possibly only chance, is, Lou Gehrig. The now-legendary first baseman

was on the New York Yankees for two full seasons before an opportunity

to play on a regular basis arrived. The starting first baseman, Wally

8
Ibid.
9
Martin, Philip L. 1972. The Labor Controversy in Professional Baseball: The Flood Case. Labor Law
Journal. September 1972. 567-572.
10
baseball-reference.com.
 4

Pipp, was in a batting slump and manager Miller Huggins decided to

give Gehrig a chance. As most baseball fans know, once in the lineup,

Gehrig stayed there for 14 straight seasons without missing a game.

The year after being replaced by Gehrig, Pipp was traded to the

Cincinnati Reds. In short, the careers of players were left up to the

fates, but more often the players were at the whim of the managers or

owners.1112

Still, even in the early part of the twentieth century not too much

of the general public was sympathetic with baseball players, who, after

all, were paid to play a game.13 They could work 14 to 16 hours a day

in a factory, mill or mine. The players of the time knew this and they

also knew that rejecting a contract might not guarantee a counter offer

by the team owner, which could mean an end to a career on the

baseball diamond and the beginning of one in the world of hard,

manual labor.

As a player, you had no say in where you worked. You could be

sent to another team at a moment’s notice. There were no long-term

contracts, as they were renewed (or not) on a yearly basis. When it

came time to negotiate your contract for the coming season you were

not permitted to have any sort of representation (i.e. an agent) when

you met with the owner. If you did not like what the owner offered, you

11
Balfour & Porter 10-12.
12
baseball-reference.com.
13
Balfour & Porter 10-12.
 5

could not shop your services elsewhere. The owner’s offer was quite

literally “take it or leave it” or face the employment choices mentioned

earlier.

If you did not like the weather in the city where you played, then

that was too bad. If you did not like your boss or your co-workers or the

way the team was run, also too bad. Your only real option was to retire

from baseball completely.14

If the Reserve Clause sounds like justification for legalized

slavery, Curt Flood and his legal team felt the same way. The

Thirteenth Amendment, which outlawed slavery in 1865, stated that:

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a

crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist

within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”15

Putting the legitimacy of the Reserve Clause to the test first

came in 1922, when the Federal Baseball League challenged the

antitrust exemption that baseball had been granted. Part and parcel of

the exemption was the presence of the Reserve Clause.

In 1913, there were two major leagues for baseball players, the

more established National League, and the American League, which

had been formed in 1901.16 There was no real relationship between the

14
Balfour & Porter 10-12
15
The U.S. Constitution and Fascinating Facts About It (7th Ed.). (2006). Naperville, IL: Oak Hill
Publishing Company.
16
baseball-reference.com.
 6

leagues, as league presidents rarely consulted each other and there

was no commissioner who oversaw baseball as there is today. The only

connection between the two leagues came in the fall, when the

winners of each league played for the World Series.

The Federal League was formed as a minor league in 1913.17

However, by placing franchises in cities that already had major league

teams it became a competitor to the American and National Leagues.

In order for the league to be viable to fans, the owners of Federal

League teams attempted to sign stars from the other leagues. The

most notable player to sign with the Federal League was the Hall of

Fame pitcher Walter Johnson. Before the ink was dry on his new

contract, Johnson’s previous team, the Washington Senators, owned by

Clark Griffith, signed him to a new, more lucrative deal.18

The Federal League had very limited success in enticing players

from the other leagues to play for them. By 1915 the league folded.

Some teams were merged into existing National or American League

teams, other terms were merged into one and became minor league

teams in support of a team in the National or American League. One

team, the Baltimore Terrapins, folded completely and took significant

financial losses. The Terrapins filed suit against the National League

saying it was in violation of the Sherman Act or antitrust regulations. A

17
Helyar, John. (1995). Lords of the Realm: The Real History of Baseball. New York: Ballantine Books.
18
Snyder 20.
 7

key part of the Terrapins’ argument was that the Reserve Clause

restricted player movement. Players could not be lured financially to

leave a National League or American League team and play for a rival

league, such as the Federal League.19

In the first court case the Terrapins, arguing as the Federal

League, actually won and were awarded $80,000. Under the provisions

of the Sherman Act antitrust awards were tripled making the amount

$240,000, which equates to just over $5.3 million in 2008 dollars, but it

was hardly enough money to revive a team, let alone an entire league.

The established leagues, arguing as the National League, appealed by

seeking antitrust exemption and won in appeals court.20

The case eventually made its way before the Supreme Court in

1922 as Federal Baseball Club v. National League. On May 29, the

William Taft-led court found unanimously in the National League’s

favor, with famed jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes writing the opinion that

baseball did not constitute interstate commerce and was in “the

business of giving exhibitions, which are purely state affairs” thereby

making it exempt from antitrust regulations.21 Antitrust experts

genuinely agree that the Supreme Court’s decision was the correct one

given the laws at the time.22 Legal experts felt that the Reserve Clause
19
Ibid.
20
Snyder 20.
21
Federal Baseball Club v. National League, 259 U.S. 200 (1922)
22
Martin 567.
 8

could only be reversed by one of two ways; either baseball owners

themselves would abolish it or Congress would pass legislation to

disallow baseball’s antitrust exemption. The former took place before

the latter, when The Curt Flood Act of 1998 was passed.23 The next

challenge to the Reserve Clause came in 1949.

Danny Gardella was an outfielder for the New York Giants who,

while being an awful fielder, hit 18 homeruns with a batting average of

.272 in 1945.24 The 1945 season was the last season that baseball was

affected by World War II. Many of baseball’s premier players, such as

Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio, were involved in the war effort and

returned to the game in 1946. Many marginal players were pushed out

of baseball, but Gardella was not. Even though officials with the Giants

felt that most of his success was due to the lack of quality pitching

because of the war, Gardella was still offered a raise of $500 up to

$5,000 for the 1946 season. But Gardella never signed and showed up

to spring training without a contract. Before the Giants could make a

trade, Gardella signed a contract with a team in the Mexican League

for $10,000. Fourteen other players followed suit. The baseball

commissioner at the time, “Happy” Chandler, placed the players on the

Restricted List, which essentially banned them from Major League

23
Curt Flood Act of 1998, Pub.L. 112 Stat. 2824, 15 U.S.C. § 27 (1998). Although passed largely as a
tribute to Flood, who had died a year earlier, the act stripped baseball of what little antitrust immunity that
remained.
24
baseball-reference.com.
 9

Baseball forever.25 As a reference point, Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe

Jackson are currently on baseball’s Restricted List.

Gardella played in Mexico for a year and then returned to the

States in 1947. He tried to play on a semi-pro team against a team

from the Negro League. Earlier that year, Jackie Robinson had broken

baseball’s color barrier and the better players in the Negro League

sensed an opportunity on a bigger stage. Word came to Chandler that

a Negro League team was about to play against a team with a player—

Gardella—who was on the Restricted List. Even though he had no

actual jurisdiction over either team involved, Chandler’s office had an

announcement made over the public address system before the game

began that warned players that if they participated in the game they

would be added to the Restricted List. Among the players on the Negro

League roster was the legendary pitcher Satchel Paige, who would

ultimately play in the Major Leagues the following year. Paige, in his

early forties at the time, realized that his window of opportunity was

closing, and any incident that delayed his path to the major leagues,

legal or otherwise, might close it permanently. It is probably safe to

assume that Paige did not argue when the game was canceled.26

Gardella then sued major league baseball and in effect became

the first player to legally challenge the Reserve Clause. His initial case

25
Snyder 21-23.
26
Snyder 26.
 10

was dismissed by a judge based on the application of the doctrine of

stare decisis in the Federal League case.27

But Gardella appealed the dismissal and his case was accepted

by the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. The court found

in Gardella’s favor, 2-1, and sent the case back to trial in District

Court.28

Appeals Judge Jerome Frank wrote in his opinion that the Reserve
Clause

“results in something close to peonage of the baseball player…

possessing characteristics shockingly repugnant to moral
principles that, at least since the War Between the States, have
been basic in America, as shown by the Thirteenth Amendment
to the constitution, condemning ‘involuntary servitude’.”29

Faced with the possibility that the Reserve Clause might be found

unconstitutional, the powers-that-be of baseball pressured Gardella

and his attorney. Respected Brooklyn Dodgers executive Branch Rickey

—who made Robinson the first black player in the major leagues—

spoke about the benefits of the Reserve Clause. Mickey Owen, who had

initially joined Gardella in the Mexican League only to return when he

was threatened with placement on the Restricted List, also spoke in

favor of the Reserve Clause. So did several established superstars of

the time.30

27
Gardella v. Chandler. l72 F. 2d 402, 408. (United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit. 1949).
28
Ibid.
29
Snyder 105.
30
Snyder 26.
 11

Gardella succumbed to the pressure and, in exchange for not

bringing the case to trial, accepted a settlement of $60,000 and

removal from the Restricted List. Gardella eventually made it back to

the major leagues with the St. Louis Cardinals—for one game and one

at bat in 1950.31

From 1949 to 1953 the New York Yankees were the best team in

major league baseball and there was not really a close second. They

won five straight World Series’ championships and were extended to

the maximum seven games only once.32 While this was a glorious time

to be a Yankee fan, a talented player in the Yankees’ minor league

system might have felt differently. Making the Yankees’ roster was only

for the excellent few, and they had little room for those players who

were merely very good. One such excellent player, or so he believed,

was pitcher George Toolson. Whether it was because of his legal

maneuverings or on-field abilities (or lack thereof), Toolson never

played in a major league game.

For several years, Toolson was a member of the Yankees AAA

(the highest classification in the minor leagues and therefore one step

from the major leagues) affiliate, the Newark Bears. Before the 1950

season, the Newark team went out of business and Toolson was sent to

a team in Binghamton, New York that was of a lower classification.

31
Snyder 27.
32
baseball-reference.com.
 12

Toolson refused to report to the Binghamton team and filed suit against

the Yankees claiming that the Reserve Clause represented a restraint

of trade.33

The district and circuit courts both invoked stare decisis in

reference to the Federal Baseball Club v. National League. But the

case, Toolson v. the New York Yankees, made its way to the Supreme

Court anyway. While the court found in favor of baseball (one of the

attorneys who argued on behalf of baseball was Bowie Kuhn) by a vote

of 7-2 its short, unsigned opinions at the conclusion of its ruling were

telling.34

The court believed strongly in stare decisis. Further still, since

baseball had operated under the presumption that it was exempt from

antitrust regulations for over 30 years, the court itself was not in

position to legislate from the bench. In short, the court believed the

body that should lift the antitrust exemption was Congress.35

In 1957, a professional football player named George Radovich

ran up against the same difficulty as Gardella. Radovich had been

blackballed from the foremost professional league, the NFL, when he

signed a contract with a team from a rival league. Upon his retirement,

33
Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc., 346 U.S. 356 (1953).
34
Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc..
35
Ibid.
 13

Radovich filed suit against the NFL. While the court agreed in principle

with Radovich’s argument that the NFL limited his rights as an

employee, they were countered by the fact that he was still paid a

competitive wage by another team in another league. Radovich’s

primary problem by 1957 was that he sought employment as a coach

in the NFL. However, because of his actions as a player, he was unable

to find work since the rival league he had signed with as a player had

gone out of business.36

When Curt Flood was traded from the St. Louis Cardinals to the

Philadelphia Phillies in 1969 he was 31 years old. He had played 12

seasons and was regarded as the premier defensive centerfielder in

the National League, having won the Gold Glove—the top defensive

honor for a player—seven times in a row.37 He had a career batting

average of .295 and made the All-Star team three times during the

1960s.38

Flood’s teammates and Cardinal fans were well aware of his

value as a player, but, prior to his pioneering lawsuit, many baseball

fans associated Flood with one of the most glaring mistakes in baseball

history.

36
Radovich v. National Football League, 352 U.S. 445 (1957).
37
baseball-reference.com.
38
Ibid.
 14

The 1968 World Series pitted his Cardinals (who had won the

series in 1964 and 1967) against the Detroit Tigers. The Cardinals

jumped out to a three to one lead in the first four games, but the Tigers

won the next two games to force a decisive Game Seven.

In the seventh inning of Game Seven, with Flood’s best friend,

Bob Gibson, pitching, the game was tied 0-0. With two men on and two

out for the Tigers, Flood misplayed an apparently simple fly ball that

allowed both men to score and put the Tigers in front 2-0. The Tigers

went on to win the game 4-1 and the series four games to three.39

Off the field, Flood was thought of as distant and occasionally

combative. With only a high school education, Flood informed himself

about issues beyond baseball and, more than most players at the time,

had an acute sense of the social and political upheaval taking place in

the world around him. He was well aware of the black power salute by

American sprinters John Carlos and Tommie Smith during the 1968

Olympics in Mexico City. He was a friend of Muhammad Ali, who gave

up the title of world heavyweight champion rather than make himself

eligible to fight in the Vietnam War. As athletes in individual sports, Ali

and the Olympic sprinters did not have to answer to a manager or

owner and feared no reprisal, such as being released or traded, as a

result of their personal politics.

39
Ibid
 15

Still, Flood spoke often with Jackie Robinson, who broke

baseball’s color barrier. In honor of Robinson, Flood wore the number

21 throughout his career, which was half of the 42 that Robinson had

worn.40

When Flood was traded he was devastated but not shocked.

Robinson himself had been in a similar situation with the Brooklyn

Dodgers. After spending 10 years with the Dodgers and enduring

countless racial epithets and becoming the most popular player on the

team Robinson was traded to the New York Giants in the winter of

1956. Rather than report to the archrival Giants, Robinson retired from

baseball.41

Flood’s situation was eerily similar. Upon hearing he’d been

traded to the Phillies Flood never considered playing for them. Not only

were the Phillies the worst team in the National League, Philadelphia

had developed a less than stellar reputation in its treatment of black

players.42 Flood simply would not go from a winning team where he felt

appreciated, to a losing team with a racist fan base. Furthermore, he

resented that he did not have a choice in the matter. He would either

retire, as Robinson had, or fight the Reserve Clause.

40
Flood 29.
41
Snyder 49.
42
Snyder 13.
 16

Flood had been active in the Major League Baseball Players

Association since its inception in 1966.43 He had fought for improving

the pensions for current and former players. Once he was traded, he

sought the counsel of the head of the Association, Marvin Miller, and

told him of his intentions.44 Miller felt that defeating baseball’s Reserve

Clause was critical to enhancing the player union’s power and that

Flood’s situation was a perfect example of the system. Yet, he insisted

that Flood, who he regarded as a bright man, decide for himself.45

On Christmas Eve 1969 Flood sent Commissioner Bowie Kuhn—

the same Bowie Kuhn who had helped represent baseball in the

Toolson case—a letter indicating that he planned to fight baseball’s

Reserve Clause in court.46

On Miller’s advice, Flood met with all of the Association’s player

representatives. The purpose of the meeting was basically two-fold.47

First, Flood wanted the Association’s public support when his suit

became public knowledge. Secondly, the Association wanted to be sure

that Flood’s challenge was in their best interest. Although they came to

an understanding the meeting was contentious. One player

43
Flood 157.
44
Snyder 24.
45
Snyder 24.
46
Snyder 93-96.
47
Snyder 73-74.
 17

representative, Tom Haller48, asked Flood if his motivation was based

more on racial politics rather than the ultimate defeat of the Reserve

Clause.49 Others wanted to be certain that Flood was not simply

leveraging a lawsuit only to take a settlement, as Danny Gardella had

done.50 Miller had told Flood that it was critical that he follow the suit

all the way through and then set out assembling the best legal team

possible.51

Arthur Goldberg, who was a former Supreme Court justice and

Labor Secretary under John F. Kennedy, was Flood’s primary

representative. Goldberg was joined by Jay Topkis, considered to be

one of the country’s best writers of court briefs, and Flood’s personal

attorney, Allan Zerman. Although an accomplished attorney, Goldberg

was also running for governor of New York when Flood’s civil trial

began in May 1970.52 The effect Goldberg’s dual commitments had on

the outcome is open to debate, but Goldberg had been expected to

easily win the Democratic primary. Instead, he found himself in an

unexpected dogfight.53

48
Maraniss, David. (2006). Roberto Clemente: The Passion and Grace of Baseball’s Last Hero. New York:
Simon & Schuster.
49
Snyder 75-77.
50
Ibid.
51
Snyder 27.
52
Snyder 147.
53
Ibid.
 18

Flood was called as the first witness and performed capably

when questioned by Goldberg. However, under cross-examination from

baseball’s lead counsel Mark Hughes and Lou Carroll, Flood seemed

edgy and inarticulate. The Judge, Irving Ben Cooper, did not help

matters by pointing out to Flood that there was a big difference

between a batter’s box and a witness box.54 The defense wondered

why someone who earned $90,000 a year (Flood’s salary in 1969)

playing baseball could be dissatisfied or refer to himself as a “well-paid

slave.”55

Most of the media had been particularly ruthless in attacking

Flood for much the same reason. Only two sportswriters of note, Red

Smith and Jim Murray, supported Flood. Aside from them, he was

regularly castigated as a greedy ballplayer in newspapers and

broadcasts throughout the country.56 No active players testified on

Flood’s behalf, but Goldberg called the diabetes-stricken Jackie

Robinson to the stand to recount his experiences with the Reserve

Clause. Robinson gave impassioned testimony about how the

54
Ibid.
55
A $90,000 salary in 1970 would be equivalent to over $500,000 in 2007. At the start of the 2008 season
the average (italics added) salary of a major league baseball player was $3.15 million.
Source: Barry M. Bloom, www. mlb.com, 04/01/08.
56
Snyder 113-114.
 19

combination of racism and the Reserve Clause were profoundly potent

weapons against the black athlete.57

Hall of Fame first basemen Hank Greenberg, who had been the

subject of countless anti-Semitic remarks by fans and players during

the course of his 17-year career with the Detroit Tigers, was also called

to testify. In 1947, the Tigers traded the high-priced Greenberg to the

historically thrifty Pittsburgh Pirates. Greenberg informed the Pirates

ownership he would play one season for them and then retire, which is

precisely what he did.58

Former player Jim Brosnan, who became an author after retiring

from baseball, also testified for the plaintiffs.59 In a twist, team owner

Bill Veeck, never a friend of the baseball establishment, spoke about

how the Reserve Clause denied him the opportunity to sign players

from other teams to help make his own team competitive.60

Testimony ended on June 11th and Cooper issued his 47-page

opinion on August 12th. Cooper found against Flood. The judge wrote

that he did not have the authority to overturn a Supreme Court

decision and Flood’s claims based on state and common law were

57
Snyder 160-165.
58
Snyder 165-168.
59
Snyder 168-172.
60
Snyder 183-188.
 20

trumped by federal law. Further, he felt that, over the course of the

trial, he had heard no testimony that was credible enough in his mind

to overturn the Reserve Clause.61 Flood was urged by Kuhn, through a

former Negro League player named Monte Irvin, to drop his claim. The

Phillies also attempted to sign Flood to a contract, but Flood did not

budge.62

By the time the 1971 season was set to begin, Flood was in dire

financial straits. Against the advice of his lawyers, Flood agreed to let

his rights be traded to the Washington Senators.63 Worn out by the

incessant media attention and personal problems his skills had

significantly eroded. He played only 13 games for the Senators before

retiring for good. He earned at least $50,000 for his efforts.64

While his body had given way, Flood’s pursuit of justice had not.

He filed an appeal that eventually made its way to the Supreme Court

in 1972.

It was the first and only challenge to the Reserve Clause that

reached the Supreme Court, a fact not lost on baseball owners, and a

sign of its waning power.

61
Snyder 191-192.
62
Snyder 200-201.
63
Ibid.
64
Snyder 228-233.
 21

Furthermore, the collective bargaining agreement signed by the

players and owners in 1970 included two major changes. If the

financial terms of the standard player’s contract could not be agreed

upon, the contract would be referred to an independent arbitrator. The

second change included what was called the 10-5 Rule. Any player with

at least 10 years of experience and at least five with his current team

could veto a trade. Obviously, had the 10-5 Rule been in place when

Flood was traded he would have invoked his right to veto.65

Curt Flood’s day before the Supreme Court came on March 20,

1972 when Arthur Goldberg spoke on his behalf. Flood’s legal team had

put extensive planning into their presentation before the court, and

Goldberg’s experience was considered a particular advantage.

However, when Goldberg took the floor he froze. Perhaps he was rusty

from his political foray. Perhaps he was intimidated by arguing before

his peers instead of with them. Perhaps he felt unprepared. He left the

planned strategy and instead recited various facts and statistics about

Flood’s playing career.66

On, June 19, 1972, Flood vs. Kuhn was decided by a 5-3 count in

favor of the defendant, with Justice Harry Blackmun casting the

decisive vote. Justice Lewis Powell had to excuse himself from the

65
Snyder 178.
66
Snyder 268-270.
 22

hearings, since he was a shareholder in the Anheuser-Busch

Corporation, which owned the St. Louis Cardinals.67

In the preliminary voting, justices William Brennan, William

Douglas and Chief Justice Warren Burger initially found for Flood.

Justices Blackmun, Thurgood Marshall, William Rehnquist, Potter

Stewart, Byron White voted in baseball’s favor. Stewart had led the

argument to affirm the findings of the appeals court. The appeals

court, like previous courts, felt it could not overturn the 1922 Federal

Baseball Team case and felt that antitrust exemptions were the work of

Congress.68

As the senior member of the majority it fell upon him to write the

opinion or to assign it to another justice. Stewart theorized that, since

the vote could wind up a deadlock, it was best to give the opinion to a

justice who was not as firm in his belief as he was. He chose Blackmun,

a devout baseball fan. It was only Blackmun’s second full term on the

Supreme Court. His opinion was essentially one that fawned over the

historical and cultural importance of baseball in American society.69

While the major league baseball owners won the battles in court,

it was clear that the Reserve Clause, as it had been in use for nearly

67

Snyder 285.
68
Snyder 283-289.
69
Flood v. Kuhn, 407 U.S. 258 (1972)
 23

100 years, was coming to end. Maintaining antitrust exemption

outweighed their love of the Reserve Clause.

In 1974, independent arbitrator Peter Seitz found that Jim

“Catfish” Hunter’s contract was invalid making him the first free agent

in baseball history.70 A year later, Seitz found that pitchers Andy

Messersmith and Dave McNally should be released from their contracts

with the Los Angeles Dodgers and Montreal Expos, respectively. Both

agreed to play the 1975 season without a current contract (they

reverted to their 1974 deals).71 McNally was an aging pitcher who was

forced into retirement in June due to injury. But, Messersmith went 19-

14 with a 2.29 ERA and was signed to a multi-year, multi-million dollar

contract by the Atlanta Braves.72 As if to confirm owners’ fears about

long-term contracts, Messersmith was injured in the 1976 season. He

never regained his health and was out of baseball completely by

1979.73

In the 1976 collective bargaining agreement, players were

granted free agency after six years of service with the same major

league team.74

70
Helyar 143-149.
71
Helyar 181-190.
72
Helyar 191.
73
baseball-reference.com.
74
Snyder 319.
 24

It is hard to say that Curt Flood sacrificed his career for the sake

of others because he had already played for 12 years when he filed

suit, but he certainly sacrificed peace of mind.

Curt Flood was not the first to challenge the Reserve Clause, but

he would be the last. No player, or any other individual for that matter,

has ever won a case against a major league sport.

Curt Flood died in 1997 at the age of 59.75 Acknowledgement of

his courage came when Congress, as it had been urged to since 1953,

removed baseball of the majority of its antitrust exemptions with the

passage of the Curt Flood of Act of 1998.76

75
Snyder 346.
76
Curt Flood Act of 1998.
 25

Bibliography

Balfour, Alan & Porter, Philip K. 1991. The Reserve Clause in

Professional Sports: Legality and Effect on Competitive Balance.
Labor Law Journal. January 1991. 8-18.

Baseball-Reference.com. (2008) Accessed March 31, 2008.

Bloom, Barry M. (2008). Average Salary in MLB Tops $3 Million.

Accessed April 1, 2008. www.mlb.com.

Flood, Curt & Carter, Richard. (1971). The Way It Is. New York: Trident
Press.

Gilroy, Thomas P. & Madden, Patrick J. (1977) Labor Relations in

Professional Sports. Labor Law Journal. December 1977. 768-776.

Helyar, John. (1995). Lords of the Realm: The Real History of Baseball,
New York: Ballantine Books.

Lomax, Michael E. (2004). Curt Flood Stood Up for Us: The Quest
to Break Down Racial Barriers and Structural Inequality in
Major League Baseball. Culture, Sport and Society. 6 (2-3)
44-70.

Maraniss, David. (2006). Roberto Clemente: The Passion and Grace of

Baseball’s Last Hero. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Martin, Philip L. 1972. The Labor Controversy in Professional Baseball:

The Flood Case. Labor Law Journal. September 1972. 567-572.
 26

McGrath, Ben (2007, October 29). The Extortionist. The New Yorker. 56-
67.

Snyder, Brad. (2006). A Well-Paid Slave: Curt Flood’s Fight for Free
Agency in Professional Sports. New York: Viking Penguin.

The U.S. Constitution and Fascinating Facts About It (7th Ed.). (2006).
Naperville, IL: Oak Hill Publishing Company.

Legal Cases and Legislation

Federal Baseball Club v. National League, 259 U.S. 200 (1922)

Flood v. Kuhn. 309 F. Supp. 793 (Southern District of New York. 1970.)

Flood v. Kuhn. 443 F.2d 264 (United States Court of Appeals Second
Circuit, 1971)

Flood v. Kuhn, 407 U.S. 258 (1972)

Curt Flood Act of 1998, Pub.L. 112 Stat. 2824, 15 U.S.C. § 27 (1998)

Gardella v. Chandler. l72 F. 2d 402, 408. (United States Court of

Appeals Second Circuit. 1949).

Radovich v. National Football League, 352 U.S. 445 (1957)

Sherman Antitrust Act, ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209, 15 U.S.C. § 1–7 (1890)

Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc., 346 U.S. 356 (1953)