Whether the Supreme Court's precedent in Federal Baseball Club should be reversed and whether the Curt Flood Act is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause

1. WHETHER THIS COURT’S DECISION IN FEDERAL BASEBALL CLUB OF BALTIMORE V. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF PROFESSIONAL BASE BALL CLUBS , 259 U.S. 200 (1922) AND ITS PROGENY SHOULD BE REVERSED? 2. WHETHER THE CURT FLOOD ACT, 15 U.S.C. § 26b IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ON ITS FACE AND/OR AS APPLIED IN VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE BY PURPORTEDLY DENYING EQUAL PROTECTION AGAINST ANTITRUST VIOLATIONS OF THE SHERMAN ACT TO MINOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYERS BUT AFFORDING THOSE ANTITRUST PROTECTIONS TO MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYERS? 3. WHETHER A PARTY WHO FAILS TO “OBJECT” PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 636, TO A MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (“R & R”)—WHICH IS BASED SOLELY ON THIS COURT’S PRECEDENT, AND WHICH CAN ONLY BE REVERSED BY THIS COURT—WAIVES IT’S RIGHT TO SEEK REIVEW OF THAT DECISION BY THIS COURT?