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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:01AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:01AM (#688668)

    A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

    Calling him out on that is not just our right, it's the duty of all freedom-loving people.

    Let me see if I get this straight. You think Trump should have no right to free speech because you disagree with him saying NFL players should have no right to free speech.

  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday June 05 2018, @04:53AM (2 children)

    A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

            Calling him out on that is not just our right, it's the duty of all freedom-loving people.

    Let me see if I get this straight. You think Trump should have no right to free speech because you disagree with him saying NFL players should have no right to free speech.

    Hmmm...Where exactly did I say "Trump should have no right to free speech"?

    I said he should be called out for saying others shouldn't have free speech rights. Are you not fluent in English, or are you trying to twist my words to support your point of view, or are you just not so bright? Perhaps all three?

    Given that L'Orange took an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States," it's interesting that he makes statements that run counter to that document.

    As such, those who love freedom and wish to preserve it, should take Trump to task by using the freedom of speech that jackass spat on.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:40PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:40PM (#688839)

      Given that L'Orange took an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States," it's interesting that he makes statements that run counter to that document.

      I'm not the Constitutional scholar like you are. Can you show me where the President exercising his right to free speech with his personal opinions is "counter to that document" excluding the fact you just don't like what he has to say?

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:54PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:54PM (#688998)

      I can always count on a left leaning nutcase to respond to a honest conversation by trying to shut down the other party. While you espouse and defend the freedom of speech of those that conservatives find offensive, you mod me troll when I ask you to back up your Trump assertions with proof. You behave exactly the same way as the object of your irrational hatred and are too dense to see it.

      As such, those who love freedom and wish to preserve it, should take Trump to task by using the freedom of speech that jackass spat on.

      You seem to love freedom of speech only when it agrees with you. Your original statement:

      A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

      is objectively wrong. It violated no principle of the Constitution. You just don't approve of the content. It is no more "counter to the highest law of the land" than me claiming NotSanguine should be deported to Guantanamo Bay. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but emotions are not facts.