1. This case involved a situation where labor and management had reached a point of impasse in their negotiations and the labor group disbanded in order to file an antitrust action against the NFL. Why did the court conclude that the NFL could implement its last offer after the collective bargaining relationship broke down? In answering this question, you must address why court chose to fall back on labor law rather than antitrust law in resolving the dispute. 2. Following up on the previous question, explain how the court applied the non-statutory exemption to the facts in this case. 3. What were the reasons for Justice Stevens' dissent in this case? Do you agree with his reasoning? Justify your decision Alston v. NCAA, 594 U.S. (2021) Answer: 1. What were the relevant markets identified by Alston? What was the alleged restriction of trade? 2. What were the procompetitive justifications offered by the NCAA? What precedent was utilized? How were these justifications received by the court? 3. What less-restrictive-alternative was presented by Alston? 4. What authority does the injunction and SCOTUS still provide to the NCAA in regulation of the relevant market? 5. This case is cited as shepherding in NIL laws, yet NIL is not the focus here. Why do you think this is the case? Fraser v. MLS, 284 F.3d 48 Answer: 1. What is the organizational structure of the MLS? Why was this structure presumed to be advantageous to the newly formed league? 2. What were the relevant markets identified by Fraser? What was the alleged restriction of trade? 3. How does the MLS structure insulate itself from Sherman & Clayton challenges?