Written by Lauryn Wang.
In a letter to Women’s Basketball Association (“WNBA”) Commissioner Cathy Engelbert, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) anticipated potential antitrust violations if the WNBA continued to interfere with the sale of the Connecticut Sun, a WNBA team based in Uncasville, Connecticut.
“Any further attempts by the WNBA to use its considerable governance and market power over the Connecticut Sun to limit or dictate negotiations with the state of Connecticut could be an unreasonable restraint of trade and interference with the market that would violate federal antitrust laws,” said Senator Blumenthal in the letter dated September 8, 2025.
The Mohegan Tribe currently owns the Sun. The Mohegan Tribe has owned the Sun since 2003 and is the first indigenous tribe to own a WNBA franchise and generate a profit. Recently, the Mohegan Tribe received two bids for the sale of the Sun valued at $325 million each from Stephen Pagliuca, the former minority owner of the Boston Celtics, and Marc Lasry, the former minority owner of the Milwaukee Bucks. If the Mohegan Tribe accepted these bids from Pagliuca or Lasry, the Sun franchise would be moved to Boston or Hartford, respectively.
The WNBA made a statement to the Boston Globe shortly after news broke that Pagliuca offered to buy the franchise to relocate it to Boston.
“Relocation decisions are made by the WNBA Board of Governors and not by individual teams,” said the WNBA. “As part of our most recent expansion process, in which three new franchises were awarded to Cleveland, Detroit and Philadelphia on June 30, 2025, nine additional cities also applied for WNBA teams and remain under active consideration. No groups from Boston applied for a team at that time and those other cities … have priority over Boston.”
The WNBA then offered to buy the Sun from the Mohegan Tribe for $250 million, seeking to retain the ability to relocate the team to a city such as Houston—one of the nine additional cities to apply for a WNBA team. Sports Illustrated reported that the WNBA preferred to assume ownership of the team and then convey it to Houston Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta, who would oversee its relocation to Houston and resurrect the former WNBA team, the Houston Comets.
Three days after Senator Blumenthal sent his letter to the WNBA, Connecticut Attorney General William Tong joined his effort to prevent the WNBA’s potential anticompetitive conduct. On September 11, 2025, Tong sent a letter to the WNBA to gather more information about its role in the sale of the Sun.
“I am troubled by recent reports in the press that the WNBA may be wrongly blocking a sale of the Connecticut Sun that would keep the Team in Connecticut in a manner that may be anticompetitive and may violate state and federal law,” said Tong.
Tong requested a copy of the WNBA, LLC Operating Agreement, the WNBA Membership Agreement between the Sun and WNBA, the WNBA Operating Manual, all other WNBA League Rules and Regulations, and copies of all valuations of the Sun, including but not limited to any appraisal, offer and/or expression of interest.
The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits conspiracies that unreasonably restrain trade. In other words, the Act prohibits individuals and companies from making agreements that are anticompetitive or attempt to monopolize a market. Senator Blumenthal warned that the WNBA may be restraining competition by interfering with the Mohegan Tribe’s negotiations with other parties in the sale of the franchise. Senator Blumenthal alleged that after the Mohegan Tribe considered offers to sell the Sun, the WNBA leveraged its league governance powers to inhibit such proposals that would keep the team in the New England area.
Senator Blumenthal considered the WNBA’s $250 million offer to purchase the Sun an effort to “strong arm” the Mohegan Tribe to control the franchise sale for its own purposes, which could amount to an impermissible interference with market operations and restriction on the tribe selling at fair market value. According to Senator Blumenthal, the Mohegan Tribe did not accept the WNBA’s offer at a price $75 million shy of the two aforementioned bids and below the Suns’ perceived market value.
While the WNBA has never been party to an antitrust lawsuit, other professional leagues have navigated antitrust liability in federal courts. In Piazza v. Major League Baseball, the court considered Major League Baseball’s motion to dismiss similar claims that the League frustrated efforts to purchase the San Francisco Giants baseball club and relocate it to Tampa Bay, Florida.
The plaintiffs in Piazza were part of a limited partnership that had submitted an application to MLB for the purchase and transfer of the Giants for $115 million. On the same day, the chairman of MLB’s Ownership Committee directed the Giants’ owner to consider other offers. The President of the National League invited an individual to make an alternative bid to purchase the Giants in an attempt to keep the team in San Francisco. Other investors ultimately made an alternate offer for $100 million. Even though the limited partnership’s offer was $15 million higher than the investors’ offer, MLB rejected the limited partnership’s offer. On this account, Plaintiffs alleged that MLB prevented their purchase and relocation of the Giants.
Plaintiffs in Piazza claimed that MLB violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act when it monopolized the market for MLB teams—placing direct and indirect restraints on the purchase, sale, transfer, relocation of, and competition for such teams.
In response, MLB moved to dismiss the antitrust claims, arguing Plaintiffs failed to allege that MLB’s actions restrained competition in a relevant market; Plaintiffs lacked standing to assert a Sherman Act claim; and MLB is exempt from liability under the Sherman Act. Of note, the exemption to federal antitrust law recognized for professional baseball is being litigated at the time of this writing (October 2025) in Cangrejeros De Santurce Baseball Club, LLC v. Liga De Béisbol Profesional De Puerto Rico.
The Piazza court found that Plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded particularized harm to establish standing and adequately alleged that MLB had restrained competition for the purchase of the Giants in certain geographic markets by rejecting bids from investors who attempted to relocate the Giants outside San Francisco.
Similarly, the WNBA rejected the bids from Pagliuca and Lasry, whose relocation plans the WNBA did not favor. If a party such as Pagliuca or Lasry, or another potential buyer of the Sun sought to assert an analogous antitrust claim against the WNBA, courts are likely to assess the matter in light of Piazza.
Just as MLB rejected the partnership’s initial $115 million bid and instead arranged for a lower alternate offer at $100 million, the WNBA rejected the Suns’ two $325 million bids and instead presented its own offer of $250 million. Accordingly, a plaintiff may contend, as Senator Blumenthal did, that the WNBA’s offer was an effort to “strong arm” the Mohegan Tribe in restraint on the purchase, sale, transfer of, and competition for WNBA teams. A plaintiff may also raise Senator Blumenthal’s contention that the WNBA leveraged its league governance powers to reject more lucrative bids and arrange for an offer below market price, excluding potential buyers from purchasing the Sun in the relevant market. This parallels MLB’s conduct at-issue in Piazza.
In the latest development of the Suns’ saga, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont has expressed vocal support for a proposed state pension system to buy a minority stake in the franchise, with a valuation higher than WNBA’s $250 million offer. The Governor-backed bid would include a 10-year guarantee that the Sun remains in Connecticut and make the state a senior investor, ensuring priority for collecting returns.
“We’re still in the middle of negotiations right now,” said Governor Lamont. “We have a very competitive bid out there for the Connecticut Sun. I think they belong in Connecticut.”
The WNBA has established rules for external investors, including limitations for pension funds. Specifically, the WNBA sets a 20% ownership cap on any pension fund, private equity firm, or sovereign wealth fund seeking ownership in a single WNBA team. To be sure, all such investments, including Lamont’s proposal, are subject to approval by the WNBA’s Board of Governors.
It is rare for state-run pension funds to invest in WNBA teams. The treasurer’s office invests in a portfolio that includes mutual funds trading in traditional stocks and bonds and private market investments in infrastructure, private equity, private credit, and natural resources.
Connecticut State Treasurer Erick Russell is the sole fiduciary responsible for overseeing state pension funds’ investments. Russell’s decisions are subject to oversight by a chief investment officer and a 12-person advisory council. The 12 members are appointed by unions representing teachers, state workers, legislative leaders, and the governor. The treasurer and the council consider capital market theory, financial and fiduciary requirements, and liquidity needs when making investment decisions.
Lamont’s proposal has garnered mixed reactions among state officials. Connecticut State Senator Ryan Fazio raised the concern that leveraging public employees’ retirement funds to spur local investment would amount to an overreach by the treasurer’s office. State House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora voiced concern over the lack of transparency surrounding the deal. On the other hand, State Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff appears to be approaching the proposal with an open mind, inquiring as to the investment’s rate of return.
The proposed investment is also contentious in the minds of Connecticut residents. The University of New Hampshire conducted a poll that revealed 54% of residents outwardly oppose the plan to purchase a minority stake in the Sun. Fifteen percent of residents support the proposal, and the rest of the population remains neutral.
At the time of this writing, the WNBA has neither addressed the correspondence from Blumenthal or Tong and the potential antitrust issues they raise, nor the possibility of a public-funded venture. The many dimensions of the Suns’ franchise sale are evidence of an evolving economic and regulatory landscape in professional women’s basketball, and the potential antitrust implications have salient ramifications for the operation of the WNBA.
The future of the Suns’ ownership remains unclear, but the case for a changing WNBA is certain. As the WNBA continues to capitalize on the recent exponential growth in the popularity and demand of professional women’s basketball, it may encounter legal hurdles in its expansion, including increased exposure to antitrust scrutiny under the Sherman Antitrust Act. New ownership models and investment vehicles may bear on traditional conceptions of independent market participation, and restrictions on franchise sales may face challenges as unreasonable restraints on trade if they are perceived to limit competition in the market of WNBA teams.
The Suns’ sale underscores these tensions. Attorney General Tong’s inquiry into the WNBA’s approval mechanisms and structure highlights potential vulnerabilities as Commissioner Engelbert navigates this next phase of growth. As the WNBA seeks to expand its reach through the establishment of new franchises and the relocation of existing teams, it will need to contend with the changing legal architecture of professional women’s sports and the realities of a rapidly evolving marketplace.
