As part of the NFL’s ongoing legal battle with former cap vendor American Needle, the league decided to make a claim that it had a “single entity” structure which allowed it to make unified business decisions of all kinds, not just branding. In a 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the claim, which if granted would have put the NFL closer to the antitrust exemption that MLB enjoys.

Soon-to-retire Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion, which included the following gems:

“Although NFL teams have common interests such as promoting the NFL brand, they are still separate, profit-maximizing entities, and their interests in licensing team trademarks are not necessarily aligned.”

“Although two teams are needed to play a football game, not all aspects of elaborate interleague cooperation are necessary to produce a game.”

The NFL Players Association, which has been seeking any kind of leverage in its difficult negotiations with the league, thinks it found some in the decision.

“The Court’s decision affirms our belief that the NFL should not be allowed to operate as a monopoly to the detriment of fans, players and the government. In a country where competition and fair play are so highly-valued, the Court wisely declined to give the NFL a leg up by usurping the role of Congress and ignoring both the letter and the spirit of its anti-trust laws.”

Obviously, the league disagrees. In any case, I don’t expect the situation to get much less contentious, even though some observers think that the decision could get the two parties back to the table more quickly. The NFL just did this as a tactic, whereas the actual debate between league and union are about major dollars-and-cents issues, several of which have the two sides miles apart (revenue sharing formula, first round draft pick salaries). As for American Needle? The case now goes back down to the lower courts.

More on the case and issues can be found at SCOTUSWiki, Forbes’ SportsMoney blog, the National Football Post, and the Wall Street Journal.