The Biden administration has recommended the U.S. Supreme Court not hear a petition by the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) that aimed to block an antitrust case against it from moving forward in New York.

If the Supreme Court follows the recommendation, the USSF and FIFA could head to trial as co-defendents in the suit brought by Relevent Sports, an event promoter based in New York owned by Stephen Ross, real estate developer and owner of the NFL’s Miami Dophins.

A ruling in favor of Relevent in such a trial could eventually pave the way for official matches by foreign clubs to be played on American soil; a potentially seismic change in the business of global soccer.

A lot would still need to happen for that to occur, though, and the Biden administration’s brief is just the latest development in a long-running and complex legal battle. Here’s what you need to know.

What’s the history here?

Relevent Sports is best known to soccer fans in the U.S. as the creator and promoter of the International Champions Cup, a series of preseason friendlies between well-known international club teams hosted at venues throughout the United States from 2013 to 2019. Relevent is still in the same business, currently promoting summer tours by La Liga (Spain’s top flight), and the English Premier League in 2024.

In August 2018, Relevent attempted to level up from preseason games, announcing that it was planning to hold a regular-season La Liga match between Barcelona and Girona in Miami. That October, soccer’s global governing body FIFA announced a policy barring domestic leagues from playing regular-season games outside its home territory, and Barcelona withdrew from its commitment.

Then in March 2019, Relevent submitted an application with the USSF, a FIFA member, to sanction an official league match between two Ecuadorian teams, Barcelona Sporting Club and Guayaquil City FC, from the country’s top-tier league. Relevent obtained approval from the LigaPro Ecuador, governed by the Ecuadorian Football Federation. USSF denied the sanction, citing the FIFA policy, and Relevent sued that September.

A federal court judge dismissed the case in 2021, only for that dismissal to be overturned on appeal in 2023. The USSF’s petition to the Supreme Court was a challenge against the revival of the suit.

The Supreme Court asked the Biden administration for its view on whether or not to hear the petition, resulting in Thursday’s brief recommending that they not do so and allow the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision to stand.

FIFA and U.S. Soccer declined to comment, citing ongoing litigation. Attorneys representing Relevent Sports did not respond to requests for comment.

Barcelona and Real Madrid played an ICC match in Miami in 2017 (Robbie Jay Barratt – AMA/Getty Images)

What is Relevent’s case?

Relevent alleges that the USSF and FIFA have worked together to prevent the organization from hosting regular-season matches involving foreign clubs in the U.S., thus violating U.S. antitrust law designed to prevent unjust collusion or monopolies.

The Biden administration wrote in last week’s briefing that the USSF was not “a passive or unknowing bystander to the adoption and enforcement of the 2018 (FIFA) policy” saying clubs must play domestic league games within their home territories.

“Rather, (USSF) was the national association that disapproved specific official league matches that (Relevent) wished to host; it was represented on the (FIFA) Council and the Committee when the 2018 policy was adopted; and it invoked the policy as its stated rationale for its disapproval decisions,” the solicitor general wrote.

Relevent sees the hosting and promotion of regular season games involving teams from around the world as crucial to running a sustainable soccer business in the United States. Large crowds have been drawn to friendly matches by foreign soccer clubs in the U.S., both via the International Champions Cup and an array of other one-off events. In July, a pre-season match between Manchester United and Arsenal drew 82,626 fans at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, setting an attendance record for a soccer match at the same venue where the World Cup final will be held in 2026.

GO DEEPER

‘It was a hell of a battle’: How New Jersey beat Dallas to host the 2026 World Cup final

What is U.S. Soccer’s defense?

The USSF has long argued that it played no role as a FIFA member in creating the 2018 policy that Relevent’s suit is centered on. Rather, the federation has argued that it has simply followed the rules set forth by FIFA, which governs the rules of the global game.

“USSF’s admitted compliance with the FIFA Policy is insufficient to support an inference that USSF and FIFA shared a ‘unity of purpose or a common design and understanding, or a meeting of minds in an unlawful arrangement,’” Judge Valerie Caproni wrote in her ruling dismissing Relevent’s case in 2021, quoting from previous antitrust case law.

In its Supreme Court petition, U.S. Soccer also warned of possible downstream effects of the litigation, arguing that Relevent’s suit could put members of any association in any industry in danger of being accused of conspiring to form a monopoly.

What comes next?

The Biden administration’s guidance is non-binding, meaning the Supreme Court can proceed as it wants, but attorneys for Relevent were quick to leverage the government’s interpretation as a reason for their case to push forward.

On Tuesday, Jeffrey Kessler, the high-profile attorney representing Relevent, submitted a letter to Judge Caproni alerting the court of the brief and asking the judge to consider this when deciding on USSF’s prior motion to dismiss their case.

The case remains pending, with a status conference scheduled for October.

(Photo: Stuart MacFarlane/Arsenal FC via Getty Images)