Feature Img

November 21, 2017 0

Ezekiel Elliot v. The NFL

The National Football League (NFL) has been flooded with off the field controversies this year, including, the ongoing legal battle between the NFL and Dallas Cowboys’ running back, Ezekiel Elliot. On August 11, 2017, the NFL suspended Ezekiel Elliot six games for violating the NFL’s personal conduct policy. This resulted from a year-long investigation by the NFL into domestic violence accusations made against him by Tiffany Thompson, an alleged ex-girlfriend. On August 15th, the NFLPA filed an appeal of the suspension. Roger Goodell, the Commissioner of the NFL chose to appoint Harold Henderson as the arbiter of the appeal hearing. Henderson upheld the suspension, sparking an ongoing legal battle between Elliot and the NFL. On August 31, Ezekiel Elliot’s legal team filed a lawsuit against the NFL in the U.S. District Court of Eastern Texas. Elliot claims that the NFL willingly overlooked critical information in their investigation that shows Thompson’s claims of domestic violence may not be credible. On September 8, the U.S. District Court of Eastern Texas ruled that “Elliot did not receive a fundamentally fair hearing”, and granted a preliminary injunction on the Henderson appeal hearing. Consequently, Elliot has been able to play; however the NFL has filed [read more]
November 17, 2017 0

Taking on the National Football League

On October 15, 2017, several news and media outlets reported that former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick would be filing a grievance against the National Football League. Kaepernick, following the requisite procedure, filed his grievance under the National Football League’s Collective Bargaining Agreement alleging collusion amongst the 32 owners of NFL teams. What started out as an individual practicing his right to protest, particularly to shed light on specific social injustices, has escalated rapidly into a national debate centered on players kneeling during the national anthem. As a result of his protest, and in combination with both the immense media coverage and fellow athletes who joined in protest, Colin Kaepernick remains unsigned a year later. In what is undoubtedly a monumental task taking on the NFL, Kaepernick still stands on the verge of making more history if an arbitrator finds the allegations are true. Article XVII(a)(1) of the NFL collective bargaining agreement states that no NFL team or employee “shall enter into any agreement, express or implied, with the NFL or any other club, its employees or agents to restrict or limit individual club decision making as to . . . whether to negotiate or not to negotiate with [read more]
November 11, 2017 0

It’s Time to Pay the Student-Athletes

It seems as if every year a new NCAA scandal emerges. This year, an FBI investigation revealed corruption, bribery, and fraud between assistant coaches, universities, investment firms, and Adidas affiliates. The biggest school involved is the University of Louisville, which is a college basketball powerhouse. In the complaint of the criminal case, U.S. v. James Gatto, it is alleged that James Gatto (Adidas’ global sports marketing director for basketball), Merl Code (a former NCAA basketball player now associated with Adidas), and Munish Sood (the founder of investment services firm Princeton Capital) paid $100,000 to a high school recruit to commit to Louisville. The case also alleges that Sood would manage the player’s money and the player would sign with Adidas when he entered the NBA. The investigation suggests that Rick Pitino was involved in this corruption, and as a result, Pitino was fired on October 16, 2017. Under the current NCAA model, student-athletes are considered amateurs and cannot be paid. It is a model that emphasizes the “spirit of the game”, and pays student-athletes with a value of an education. Education is extremely important; however, its value is minuscule compared to how much money these top college football and basketball programs [read more]
November 8, 2017 0

Collective Bargaining for Farmworkers

Freedom of association protects workers’ rights to organize and collectively bargain. Collective bargaining is when workers negotiate with their employer over important arrangements, such as employee benefits and working conditions, with the idea that workers have more bargaining power collectively than individually. Farmworkers have been systemically denied the right to collectively bargain and organize throughout American history. The 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) excluded farmworkers from the right to collective bargaining. Although this was the progressive era for workers’ rights legislation, it was also the Jim Crow law era. Consequently, farmworkers’ legal exclusion from collective bargaining was likely approved by Congress because the profession had a majority African American workforce. New York law on the matter is in conflict. In 1937, New York passed its State Employee Relations Act (SERA), which conformed to the NLRA’s exclusion of farmworkers. The New York Constitution, passed in 1938, states that there exists a right to organize and bargain collectively. Yet, New York has continued to deny farmworkers their right to associate and bargain with employers. Despite SERA clearly violating the plain language of New York’s Constitution and international criticism of the exclusion, the conflict has now become a matter for the court. [read more]
October 1, 2017 0

Constitutionality of DACA Rescission

On September 5, the current administration rescinded the guarantee to many young people currently in America illegally that the government would not interfere with their work or studies. This program, known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (or DACA) was designed to allow young undocumented immigrants, brought to America illegally, work permits and safety from deportation. This group of young people, colloquially known as “Dreamers,” is a group of high-functioning, well-educated young men and women that are arguably aiding the United States economy. This rescission is extremely unpopular, with 73 percent of Americans wanting legislation that protects Dreamers from deportation. President Trump has come out in support of protecting the group, and claims that he hopes “Congress will be able to help them out and do it properly.” So if the president and the American people are in support of DACA, why get rid of it? Part of that answer stems from a 2015 case, Texas v. United States, in which 26 states challenged the lawfulness of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (“DAPA”) and the expansion of DACA. DAPA was similar to DACA, but it applied to the parents of children with permanent legal [read more]
September 27, 2017 0

North Dakota’s Relaxed Pro Hac Vice Provision for Water Protectors Should Stay

The North Dakota Legislature clarified that it believes constructing pipelines matters more than protecting people’s right to peacefully protest when it passed legislation in January 2017 that increases penalties for and further criminalizes acts of non-violent resistance. The impetus for this batch of anti-protest legislation was the Standing Rock movement, in which the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe brought attention to the Dakota Access Pipeline (“DAPL”) and thousands of people joined the resistance against DAPL’s construction. Since August 2016, over 700 people have been arrested from the DAPL protests, resulting in an unprecedented caseload for North Dakota’s South Central District Court. These cases involve a mix of legal issues, including mass arrests, civil disorder, conspiracy to commit reckless endangerment, indigenous Treaty rights, and environmental rights, among others. The unprecedented buildup and types of cases have made it very difficult, if not impossible, for local counsel alone to provide adequate representation for these water protectors. Special Provision for Adequate Representation In January 2017, attorneys petitioned the North Dakota Supreme Court for changes in North Dakota’s pro hac vice procedures (pro hac vice allows an attorney to legally practice in a jurisdiction where she or he is not licensed without committing unauthorized practice [read more]
April 9, 2017 0

Dairy Farmers & a Missing Comma: O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy

A missing comma caused much consternation over the meaning of a state’s employment laws at the First Circuit recently. In a March 13, 2017 decision, the appellate court worked overtime to analyze Maine’s Wage and Hour Law and a specific statutory exemption that would apply to drivers of enumerated food products. Specifically, this exemption noted that Maine’s overtime protection would not apply to workers involved in “[t]he canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of: (1) Agricultural produce; (2) Meat and fish products; and (3) Perishable foods.” 26 M.R.S.A. § 664(3)(F) (emphasis added). The emphasized portion was the core of the dispute, and the court’s reasoning provides insights for lawyers arguing about ambiguity before the First Circuit. The delivery driver plaintiffs argued that the exemption referred to the packing, either for shipment or distribution, of perishable foods. They neither packed product for shipment nor packed it for distribution. As the drivers were involved with the delivery, not the packing of these foods, they claimed they fell outside the exemption and, therefore, were allowed to collect overtime pay. The dairy farm defendants were steamed and contended in opposition that the exemption referred to two distinct activities, either [read more]
March 28, 2017 0

States Push Back Against Peaceful Protests (Part One)

In the wake of President Trump’s executive order banning immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries, millions of protestors took to the streets across the country to voice their concerns and grievances involving Trump’s immigration stance. While Muslims and Muslim support groups are encouraged by and grateful for the support provided by protestors across the country, Republican lawmakers are pushing legislation that would criminalize nonviolent protest. For example, in Iowa, lawmakers have introduced a bill that would make blocking traffic a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. In Minnesota, lawmakers proposed an anti-protest bill that would dramatically stiffen fines for freeway protests and would allow prosecutors to seek up to a full year of jail time for protestors blocking a highway. In Indiana, legislators have introduced a bill that would allow police to remove protestors blocking traffic using “any means necessary.” These are not the only states considering anti-protest bills. Others include: Washington, Michigan, North Dakota, Virginia, Colorado, North Carolina, and Missouri. These various anti-protest bills have caught the attention of the nation’s most active civil liberties guardians, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the First Amendment Coalition (FAC). Lee Rowland, a senior attorney at the ACLU, and [read more]
March 26, 2017 0

Electoral College: Outdated, but Here to Stay

The recent election has brought the United States’ presidential voting system, the Electoral College, into the limelight. Through this system, each state is awarded a number of electoral votes based on its number of representatives in Congress. In all states except Maine and Nebraska, the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in that state is awarded all of the state’s electoral votes. A President then wins the election by receiving at least 270 electoral votes. This system of voting was originally adopted out of fear. The founding fathers were worried both about “tyranny of the majority” and that citizens could be manipulated by a powerful, persuasive individual in a direct democracy. They established the Electoral College to work as a check on the population, creating an additional body to oversee the vote of the President and ensure that the President was competent. In November’s election, Hilary Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, outperformed Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, in the popular vote by almost 2.9 million people, earning 48.2% of the popular vote as opposed to Trump’s 46.1%. Yet Clinton failed to win the election, earning only 232 electoral votes, compared to Trump’s 306. On January 20, 2017, President Trump [read more]
March 8, 2017 0

Legal Protection of a Digital Resurrection

Not long ago, the death of an actor also meant the death of his or her characters. If the actor died before filming was complete, there may have been no other choice but to scrap the movie altogether. Now, however, advances in technology have made it possible to digitally “resurrect” actors, thereby potentially saving both the characters and the films. Thanks to continuing improvements in computer-generated imagery (CGI) technology, when Nancy Marchand died while filming The Sopranos or when Paul Walker died while filming Furious 7, their characters were able to live on despite their deaths until the writers were able to write in a more natural exit for the character. Most recently, in December 2016, Peter Cushing virtually reprised his role of Grand Moff Tarkin in Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, despite his death in 1994. These digital resurrections are not flawless, but they are often unnoticeable to the untrained eye. Furthermore, the recent improvements in CGI quality suggest that a computer-generated actor that “will fool even experienced professionals” may not be far off. CGI technology may have a lot of positive benefits in the film industry. For example, the increasing quality of CGI technology has the potential [read more]

Copyright © 2024 | MH Purity lite WordPress Theme by MH Themes