Flood V. Kuhn
Commissioner Kuhn denied Flood's request for free agency, citing the propriety of the reserve clause and its inclusion in Flood's 1969 contract. In January 1970 Flood filed a $1 million lawsuit against Kuhn and Major League Baseball, alleging violation of federal antitrust laws. Even though Flood was making $90,000 at the time, he likened the reserve clause to slavery; it was a controversial analogy, even among those who opposed the reserve clause. Among those testifying on his behalf were former players Jackie Robinson and Hank Greenberg, and former owner Bill Veeck; no active players testified, nor did any attend the trial. Although players' union representatives had voted unanimously to support Flood, rank-and-file players were strongly divided, with many fervently supporting the management position.
Flood v. Kuhn (407 U.S. 258) eventually went before the Supreme Court. Flood's attorney, former Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, asserted that the reserve clause depressed wages and limited players to one team for life. Major League Baseball's counsel countered that Commissioner Kuhn had acted "for the good of the game."
Ultimately the Supreme Court, invoking the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), ruled 5-3 in favor of Major League Baseball, citing as precedent a 1922 ruling in Federal Baseball Club v. National League (259 U.S. 200). Justice Lewis Powell recused himself owing to his ownership of stock in Anheuser-Busch, which owned the Cardinals.
In 1970 the owners and the MLBPA agreed to the "10/5 Rule" (sometimes called the "Curt Flood Rule"), which allows players with ten years of Major League service, the last five with the same team, to veto any trade.
Read more about this topic: Curt Flood