October Term 2000 · Docket 00-203

Does the federal government have the authority to force a baseball team to change its name?

The government seeks to compel the Cleveland Indians to abandon their team name. The team argues this action violates its rights.

Official caption
United States v. Cleveland Indians Baseball Co.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Feldman argued on behalf of the side that brought the case.

    Mr. Phillips argued on behalf of the opposing side.

    Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the oral argument.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on the federal government's power to mandate a name change for a professional sports team. The government argues the name is harmful. The team argues the government lacks this specific authority.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 27, 2001.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The government wants the team to change its name.

The team wants to keep its current name.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The government argues the name causes harm and must change.

The team argues the government cannot force this specific change.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Does the federal government possess the legal power to mandate this name change?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the limits of federal power over private business names. It sets a precedent for government regulation of commercial identity.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON