Oakland Athletics Stadium Update: Supremes To Decide If They Will Hear San Jose’s Lawsuit
Could Oakland Athletics baseball move to San Jose? The latest development occurred on Monday when Howard Mintz of the San Jose Mercury News reported that the United States Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on whether or not to hear City of San Jose v. Commissioner of Baseball as soon as later this week.
Previously, the city of San Jose had lost its suit against the big leagues when the 9th Circuit ruled that there was too much precedent in order to overturn Major League Baseball’s antitrust exemption that it has enjoyed since 1921.
Why This Is Important
This is the city of San Jose’s last chance to swipe the Athletics away from Oakland. As many readers know, the Athletics cannot not move to San Jose under the current MLB framework due to territorial rights belonging to the San Francisco Giants. San Jose’s lawsuit intends to get around territorial rights by challenging MLB’s antitrust exemption, and the Supreme Court is seen as the only body in the land that can undo this exemption.
A decision to even hear the case would be a huge symbolic victory for San Jose. Mintz’s article speculates that a decision to hear the case could prompt a settlement from baseball, even if the city’s argument has a small chance at winning. A settlement could include anything from a sum of cash to an order that tells the Giants something to the effect of ‘The A’s can go to San Jose. Get over it.’
More from White Cleat Beat
- Zach Logue yet another disappointing Oakland A’s trade return
- Luis Barrera heading to familiar foe in Los Angeles Angels
- Looking back at Ruben Sierra with the Oakland A’s
- San Francisco Giants showing Oakland A’s offseason could be worse
- Lucas Luetge what Oakland A’s need in bullpen
What Happens Now
So what is the likelihood that the Supremes decide they want to hear San Jose’s argument? Realistically, the chances are not very good. The Court agrees to hear only a tiny fraction of all cases presented to it each term. But there are a few intriguing things to think about this time.
The first is that only four of the nine justices need to agree to a case in order for it to be heard. The city does not need to win over a majority of the justices immediately.
The second is that several justices currently sitting on the court have a mixed record on antitrust cases, so it is difficult to predict which way they will decide. For example, five of the sitting justices wrote an opinion back in 2007 (Leegin v. PSKS) that, according to former Federal Trade Commission attorney Pamela Harbour, “…should lead to the demise of the baseball exemption.”
On the other side of that decision was Justice Stephen Breyer, who was once an attorney that specialized in antitrust litigation. Additionally, two more justices have been appointed to the high court since the Leegin decision, and it remains unclear how they will react to new antitrust cases.
The third is that Major League Baseball hasn’t been challenged on this issue since the seventies. 2015 might be the year that the legal system decides that their antitrust exemption is out of date.
More from Oakland A's News
- Zach Logue yet another disappointing Oakland A’s trade return
- Luis Barrera heading to familiar foe in Los Angeles Angels
- San Francisco Giants showing Oakland A’s offseason could be worse
- Lucas Luetge what Oakland A’s need in bullpen
- Oakland A’s bring Deolis Guerra back on minor league deal
The main takeaway is that even those closest to the court are incapable of predicting if this case will be heard.
As for the A’s
Lew Wolff has been warming up to the idea of building a modern ballpark in Oakland, and the city now has the ability to negotiate a stadium deal without the assistance of developer Floyd Kephart. These are major positives that indicate that it is more likely than not that the A’s are going to continue calling Oakland their home.
Having said that, A’s ownership has certainly set up a Google News alert for San Jose v. Commissioner of Baseball (just in case).