vices at the lowest price possible. (Ross 152) The first two sections of the Sherman Act state:
             1. Every contract, combination in the form of a trust or otherwise of conspiracy,
             in restraint of trade or commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations is hereby declared to be illegal.
             2. Every person who shall monopolize or attempt to monopolize any part of the trade or conspire with any other person or persons to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several states or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor (Leeds and Von Allmen 125-126)
             Baseball's antitrust exemption originates in a case held in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entitled "Federal Baseball Club, Inc. v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs." This case challenged the two previously mentioned sections of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In this case, the Federal Baseball League, a direct competitor of the National League, claimed that the National League had become a "combination, conspiracy, and monopoly." (Villanova University Sports and Entertainment Law Journal Vol. II: Issue 2, L.F. 189, p.6) Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, known primarily as a trustbuster, ruled against the Federal League without any real factual basis behind his decision. This sign of favoritism was the beginning of a long line of legal privileges that were provided to Major League Baseball en route to its antitrust exemption. A subsequent case in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia further solidified this ruling when it stated:
             The business of providing exhibition baseball games was a 'sport' and not 'trade' or 'commerce' for Sherman Act purposes. . . . The business of giving exhibitions of baseball is intrastate in character, it cannot be transferred across state lines. (McMahon and Rossi - Villanova University Sports and Entertainment Law Journal Vol. II: Issue 2, ...