[Conscience of a Conservative]

“Why, because of WHO is representing them, or the merits of the law?”

The merits. There is a binding contract (the NBA constitution/by-laws), and the league acted within the scope of its authority under that contract.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I don’t know…the NBA might have pushed the envelope of their authority on this one….

[Red Steel]

The merits. There is a binding contract (the NBA constitution/by-laws), and the league acted within the scope of its authority under that contract.

And those are what CON? It likely is that it would take a majority of NBA owners to vote Sterling out of the league. And I doubt the owners gave the NBA Commish the unilateral power to remove an owner from his NBA team.

[Mariner]

"The merits. There is a binding contract (the NBA constitution/by-laws), and the league acted within the scope of its authority under that contract."

The Commissioner was asked in the Press Conference what by law or constitution article was breached and the Commissioner declined to answer saying only that he had the OK from the lawyers.

It's likely very vague, at best.

This has lawsuit written all over it.

[Mariner]

Besides, imaginge the contents of the DISCOVERY process.

All communications between the other owners, NBA offices and Players Union.

Yep, the man would be crazy not to sue.

[longtermmemmory]

even if there is a contract, there are implied covenants of fair dealing and non-collusion.

[SeaHawkFan]

Have you read the NBA constitution and bylaws?

I posted the link in: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3150059/posts?page=404#404