Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

End of sincerity? Is the constitution of the NBA to trump the Constitution of the United States?
The Peripatetic Philosopher ^ | April 30, 2014 | Dr. James R. Fisher

Posted on 04/30/2014 12:30:12 PM PDT by AZLiberty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

1 posted on 04/30/2014 12:30:12 PM PDT by AZLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]

Key word being CONGRESS

A PRIVATE organization like the NBA is fully within its rights to sanction a fellow franchise owner


2 posted on 04/30/2014 12:33:24 PM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

The Right of Free Association is also enshrined in the Constitution.


3 posted on 04/30/2014 12:36:10 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty
The text of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It doesn't mention the NBA. It doesn't say you can say anything you like without other people reacting to it. It certainly doesn't confer the right to own a basketball team. It only says *Congress* shall not infringe your rights to speech/religion/assembly etc. What has Congress done to Don Sterling?

4 posted on 04/30/2014 12:37:28 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH – WHERE IS THE NBA IN ALL THIS?

In all his bull sessions at the University of Iowa did nobody tell Dr. Fisher that the 1st Amendment is there to protect our speech from government censorship and that the NBA is not the governmnet? They can sanction whatever owner or player they want for anything that owner or player does or says.

5 posted on 04/30/2014 12:37:32 PM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Ha you beat me to it.


6 posted on 04/30/2014 12:38:13 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: AZLiberty

the constitution limits the power of the State; the NBA is a private organization. the NBA is thus not constrained by the US Constitution. furthermore, sterling voluntarily agreed to be bound by the NBA Constitution; no one forced him to. finally, while sterling has a right to his noxious, racist views, he does not have a “right” to own an NBA franchise; that is a privilege

finally, it is not clear that sterling was unaware he was being recorded. apparently his mistress was employed as his “archivist” and sterling knew she was recording him, according to some reports.


8 posted on 04/30/2014 12:39:49 PM PDT by ghost of stonewall jackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

I hope Sterling sues the NBA. At least one theory being the NBA is seeking an out of proportion penalty when weighed against the nature of the man’s wrong.


9 posted on 04/30/2014 12:41:02 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

I hope Sterling sues the NBA. At least one theory being the NBA is seeking an out of proportion penalty when weighed against the nature of the man’s wrong.


10 posted on 04/30/2014 12:41:15 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

Since the US Constitution apparently says I have to buy health insurance under threat of penalty, I suppose the NBA one can force the sale of a team.


11 posted on 04/30/2014 12:42:28 PM PDT by Ingtar (The NSA - "We're the only part of government who actually listens to the people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty
That said what is disturbing to me is the invasion of privacy, the violation of free speech, and the overwhelming emotional piling on that everyone seems to be engaged in without a moment’s reflection on what it may mean – down the road – to everyone else in terms of freedom of speech.

To say nothing of depriving a man of his lawfully owned property and his right to enjoy his property.

This is bad, really bad.

12 posted on 04/30/2014 12:45:53 PM PDT by sauropod (Fat Bottomed Girl: "What difference, at this point, does it make?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ghost of stonewall jackson
while sterling has a right to his noxious, racist views, he does not have a “right” to own an NBA franchise; that is a privilege

Exactly. And if some other organization you belong to, say your health club, tries to fine you for your speech, you'd tell them to pound sand.

Difference is, this privelege is so lucrative that Sterling will do whatever they say.

13 posted on 04/30/2014 12:47:12 PM PDT by Rinnwald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Please tell me where in the 5th Amendment it states that if someone is a racist and expresses those views, he loses his right to acquire, use, and own property as he sees fit.

Be specific.


14 posted on 04/30/2014 12:47:21 PM PDT by sauropod (Fat Bottomed Girl: "What difference, at this point, does it make?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
To say nothing of depriving a man of his lawfully owned property and his right to enjoy his property.

Maybe, maybe not. Did his purchase of the team include an agreement that he would be held to certain standards, and that his actions could result in certain consequences? I'm guessing the answer to that is yes.

15 posted on 04/30/2014 12:47:33 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ghost of stonewall jackson
he does not have a “right” to own an NBA franchise; that is a privilege

So if he is forced to sell, he should be fully compensated at fair market value for his property.

16 posted on 04/30/2014 12:49:17 PM PDT by sauropod (Fat Bottomed Girl: "What difference, at this point, does it make?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
Please tell me where in the 5th Amendment it states that if someone is a racist and expresses those views, he loses his right to acquire, use, and own property as he sees fit.

Show me where the government has deprived him of that right. Show me where *anyone* has deprived him of that right. At worst, the NBA is exercising its own rights to freedom of speech and association and its rights under whatever contracts exist between Sterling, the Clippers, and the rest of the NBA.

17 posted on 04/30/2014 12:51:11 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

Guessing, smesshing.

Show me the agreement he signed that has a morals clause or some other clause regarding his conduct.


18 posted on 04/30/2014 12:51:24 PM PDT by sauropod (Fat Bottomed Girl: "What difference, at this point, does it make?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

Can you not hear the jackals howling for him to lose everything? I distinctly recall more than one commentator stating so.

The NBA can do what it wants. Doesn’t make it right.


19 posted on 04/30/2014 12:53:12 PM PDT by sauropod (Fat Bottomed Girl: "What difference, at this point, does it make?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
So if he is forced to sell, he should be fully compensated at fair market value for his property.

I haven't heard any suggestion he wouldn't be.

20 posted on 04/30/2014 12:53:27 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson