Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Sunday June 03 2018, @10:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the naughty-naughty dept.

The Center for American Progress reports

Last month, the NFL announced a new policy for its players during the national anthem: Players are permitted to stay in the locker room during the anthem, but if they go out onto the field during it, they must stand. If any of the players takes a knee, the team will be fined.

Soon afterwards, a Wall Street Journal report confirmed what most have long suspected: That President Donald Trump's public outrage about NFL players protesting police brutality and systemic racism during the national anthem at football games heavily influenced NFL owners to change the rule, and discouraged them from signing players who would protest.

It's all terrible news for those in favor of free speech and peaceful protest, and for those against white nationalism and police brutality.

However, Mark Geragos, the lawyer representing Kaepernick in his collusion lawsuit against the NFL, [...] believes [...] that Trump's direct influence over NFL owners on this issue violates federal law. U.S. Code 227 [which] says that members of Congress or the executive branch cannot "wrongfully influence a private entity's employment decision ... solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation".

A few revelations from the last couple of weeks strongly support Geragos' case here, and it's important to remember that Geragos knows much more about the case than we do--he has taken the depositions of more than a dozen NFL owners, while the public only knows about the depositions that have leaked.

[...] Of course, influencing the private hiring decisions of a company isn't the only part of U.S. Code [227] that needs to be proved; it would also have to be shown that Trump did it for partisan political purposes.

That sounds trickier to prove, but in this case, that's not necessarily true. First of all, Trump's comments were made at a political rally supporting an Alabama Republican candidate for US Senate--an expressly partisan environment. And according to the WSJ, Trump told Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones in private conversations that the issue was a "winning" one for him.

Previous: NFL: New National Anthem Rule; NY Jets CEO: Break the Rule and I'll Pay the Fine


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @12:43AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @12:43AM (#688167)

    When you point at someone, there are 3 fingers pointing back at you.

    I'll stick with my sources of information.
    ...meanwhile, it won't surprise me if you stick with your sources of "information".
    58 percent of claims made during Fox News broadcasts were mostly false or worse [google.com]

    N.B. For those who are bad at Arithmetic, that means they get it wrong more often than they get it right.

    .
    Trump expressed an opinion. Publicly. Perfectly within his rights

    ...unless, as the trained, experienced lawyer notes, it was done for a political purpose, using his office as leverage.

    Trump violates the Emoluments clause(s) of the Constitution hourly, using his public office to enrich himself.
    It should surprise no one that he has done this act which pushes out his posturing to his tiny[1]) voter base.

    [1] Like other things of his, we are told. [google.com]

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @01:46AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @01:46AM (#688179)

    It looks like a gun, and they have the right to defend themselves, with lethal force if necessary, from you.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @06:58PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @06:58PM (#688511)

      Great job illustrating how crazy you are and why we should have stricter gun control laws that prevent the mentally unstable (you) from owning one.